From Our Bureau
NEW DELHI: A Supreme Court Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India N V Ramana, on Friday agreed to hear on March 15 a plea by Kirloskar Brothers Ltd (KBL) CMD Sanjay Kirloskar against the Bombay High Court order for arbitration in a family feud related to the assets.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the company told the Court that the other side has been taking benefit of mediation by seeking repeated adjournments while continuing promotional and other activities, including advertisements, taking advantage of the mediation.
The Bench, also comprising Justices A S Bopanna and Hima Kohli, fixed the hearing on March 15, after it was told that the mediation by former Supreme Court judge Indu Malhotra to settle the family feud has failed.
In the appeal, it was contended that the order of the high court is factually and legally untenable and misconceived and it contains serious errors of fact and law and incorrect findings have been arrived at on an erroneous basis.
On July 27 last year, the top court had ordered status quo in the case between the feuding family members of the Kirloskar group and asked industrialist Atul Chandrakant Kirloskar and 13 others, made respondents by KBL, to apprise it of their opinion on the issue of mediation to settle the matter. It had also extended stay on the proceedings in a Pune civil court on KBL seeking damagers for violation of the family deed.
The feud over the deed of family settlement relating to the assets of the more than 130-year Kirloskar group reached the apex court after Sanjay Kirloskar appealed against the Bombay High Court order that had relegated the dispute to arbitration.
The Kirloskar family members had entered into a deed of family settlement (DFS) in 2009. According to the appeal, under the DFS, disputes relating to the Kirloskar Institute of Advanced Management Studies (KIAMS) and Kirloskar Foundation (KF) are to be resolved unanimously.
In case there is no unanimity, the issue is to be referred to two arbitrators — Anil Alwani and C H Naniwadekar. If they differ in opinion, the dispute is to be referred to the third arbitrator, Srikrishna Inamdar. DFS makes it clear that only disputes relating to KIAMS and KF shall be referred for arbitration and not other disputes, the appeal said.
Another DFS clause states that no one in the family will compete with any other member in business, it added. According to KBL, this clause has been violated by Rahul and Atul who have taken a stake in a pump manufacturing company, namely La Gajjar Machineries Pvt Ltd.
Being aggrieved, KBL had earlier filed a case in a Pune civil court seeking Rs 750 crore damages for violation of the agreement. During the pendency of the suit in Pune court, Atul, Rahul and other respondents moved the Bombay High Court saying DFS had a clause that in case of dispute the parties can go in for arbitration. The High Court, hearing their plea, had agreed with them and ordered a resolution through arbitration.
