Delhi: On Tuesday, the Bombay High Court, while giving a major blow to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), retained the Arbitration Award of more than Rs 538 crore in favor of Kochi Tuskers Kerala. This decision is Justice R.I. Chhagla’s single bench narrated and dismissed BCCI’s appeal.
Court rejected BCCI’s arguments
The BCCI argued in the court that the Arbitration Tribunal went out of its jurisdiction and gave the verdict. Also, accused of paying too much money as a loss. But the court made it clear that the role of the court is limited under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Therefore, he cannot interfere in the decision of the arbitrator.
Kochi Tuskers travel from IPL
Kochi Tuskers Kerala was selected for the 2011 IPL season. This team was bought by a group led by Rendezvous Sports World (RSW). The team played the same season. The BCCI then canceled the team’s contract, saying it did not give 10% bank guarantee, which was a violation of the franchise agreement.
Kochi tuskers kept their compulsion
Kochi Cricket Private Limited (KCPL) said in the court that the delay in bank guarantee was caused by some necessary paperwork, availability of stadium and sudden change in the number of IPL matches. Despite this, BCCI continued talks with KCPL for several months and also accepted payment. Then suddenly the contract was canceled and the already given bank guarantee also redeemed.
Kochi tuskers win in arbitration
In 2012, KCPL and RSW started the process of arbitration against BCCI. In 2015, the tribunal gave the decision in his favor. An order was given to give Rs 384 crore to KCPL and Rs 153 crore to RSW for wrong landing of bank guarantee. It also included interest and legal expenses.
Wrong decisions were given
BCCI challenged the tribunal’s decision. He said that the amount given to compensate for the loss is unfair and a violation of the contract rules. He also questioned the RSW claim that he cannot claim under the Partnership Act.
BCCI ignores the time limit
The court said that the documents available in the records show that BCCI itself ignored the bank guarantee deadline and later improperly abolished the franchise. The court admitted that it was a violation of BCCI’s contract rules.
The judiciary strengthened the process of arbitration
With this decision, the High Court gave a message that the Arbitration Award can be challenged only under limited circumstances which have been decided in the law. Just because there can be another attitude, it does not cause the reference to be rejected.
Related news
(Tagstotranslate) bcci