BEFORE THE LD. SOLE ARBITRAOR DR.

ABHISHEK ATREY

ADVOCATE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

ARBITRATION BETWEEN

Kanade Anand Udyog Private Limited

having office at Kanade House,

Plot no: 148, Inside Sahar cargo estate,

Near Professional courier,

D P Road, J B Road,

Andheri- East,

Mumbai- 400099 …Claimant

And

1. Cairn India Limited

3rd and 4th Floor

Vipul Plaza, Sun city,
sector 54,Gurugram, Haryana-122002
now merged into Vedanta
having address at___________________________
…Respondents

STATEMENT OF CLAIM ON BEHALF KANADE ANAND UDYOG

PRIVATE LIMITED

It is humbly submitted as under:

 2

1) That Claimant is a Private Ltd. Company. engaged in the business

of manufacturing of Industrial Gratings, Cable Trays and
Ducts & Earthing Equipment etc.

1. That Claimant company vide work contract dated 24th

January,2014 allotted work of supply of Gratings for the company’s
operation at Rajashtan in the RJ-ON-90 Block. A Copy of the work
7contract dated 24th January,2014 is annexed herewith and marked
as Exhibit A.

2. That as per the work tender/contract claimant company have

regularly supplied the gratings to Respondent company as per the
requirement.

3. Claimant state that, as per the contract the normal delivery schedule
is 8 weeks from the date of issuance of Call out order, but claimant
received drawing approval and manufacturing clearance from M/s.
Cain in claimant’s office on 17.09.2014. The process of delivery went
through various phases including Purchase Order, Drawing
approval, Manufacturing clearance and inspection by Third party of
the customer then despatch clearance and Road Permits from
erstwhile M/s. Cain India Ltd. now Vedanta.

4. Claimants states That against respondent valid and confirmed order

claimant did its job work from time to time on credit basis as
Respondent have running credit account in the account books of
claimant operated in due course of business. The work contract
mandates that the bill be cleared within stipulated time of 30 days
but the Respondent have never honour the payment scheduled.
5. Claimant states that they have raised total claim of
Rs.74,29,578.00 (Rs.Seventy Four Lakhs Twenty Nine Thousand
Five Hundred Seventy Eight Only) to Respondent company vide
various invoice numbers but to the shock and dismay, Respondent
company arbitrarily deducted an amount of Rs.
7,42,957.80( Rupees Seven Lakhs fourty two thousand nine
hundred fifty seven only) towards late delivery charges on
 3

whole project. A copy of the invoices are annxed herewith and

marked as Exhibit B

6. Clamant states that Respondent unilateral action deducting the

amount of Rs.7,42,957.80( Rupees Seven Lakh fourty two
thousand nine hundred fifty seven only) is arbitrary and not
within spirit of the contract. Statement of accounts are
annexed herewith and marked as Exhibit c.

7. Claimant state respondent company deducted the amount on the

total call out order value and not on the delayed portion of the
delivery and same is against the principle of equity and good
conscious .

8. Claimant states that the assignment project is completed,

the Respondent company have also illegally retain the bank
guarantees furnished by claimant as per the contract note
(Bank Guarantee Nos (1)113GOPG142070001 dt.26.07.14
and (2) BG No. 113GPGE143380001 dt. 04.12.2014.
9. That the claimant time and again requested the Respondent
company to refund the amount and Bank guarantee but the
Respondent company failed to response. Copies of the email
and letter are annxed herewith as Exhbit C,D.
10. Finally the claimant company vide Legal notice
dated______through its advocate Ravindra Lokhande call
upon the Respondent Company to refund the LD Charges
and Bank Guarantees. The Respondent company failed to
reply. A copy of the Legal Notice dated______and postal
receipts and acknowledgment are annexed herewith as
Exhibit E
11. Thereafter the Claimant company appointed its arbitrator
and requested Respondent company to appoint their arbirtor
vide letter dated_________. A copy of the letter dated_and
acknowledgment recipt is annxed herewith and marked as
Exhibit f.
12. The Respondent Compnay failed to appoint the there
arbitrator within 30 days and therefore this claim is filed
 4

before the sole arbitrator as per the contract Terms. A

relevant clauses of arbitration is annxed herewith and
marked as Exhibit F.
13. The cause of action to file this complaint first time arises
on ____, when the Respondent company dedudcted the Ld
Charges. And further arises on________, when inspite of the
Legal Notice the Respondent company failed to pay the LD
Charges.
14. It is submitted that. The issue preferred to Tribunal is
within the arbitration agreement and under law and this
Hon’ble Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain and decide the
dispute

PRAYERS

1. The Claimants therefore, pray that this Hon’ble Tribunal may

be pleased to pass an award in favour of Kananade Anand
Udyog Pvt. Ltd and against the Respondents 1 for a total sum
of Rs. 7,42,957.80( Rupees Seven Lakh fourty two thousand
nine hundred fifty seven only)with pendent lite and future
interest 18% till realization of awarded amount and also
direct to return the Bank Guarantee bearing No.
(1)113GOPG142070001 dt.26.07.14 and (2) BG No.
113GPGE143380001 dt. 04.12.2014.
.

Mumbai

Dated

Claimants

VERIFICATION
 5

I, ________________________Director, do hereby solemnly declare

that what is stated in paragraph 1 to ___ is true to my knowledge

on belief and I believe the same to be true.

Solemnly Declared at Mumbai ]

This. ]

Before me,

Advocate for the Claimants

Ravindra A.Lokhande

BEFORE THE LD. SOLE ARBITRAOR DR. ABHISHEK ATREY

ADVOCATE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

ARBITRATION BETWEEN
 6

KANADE ANAND UDYOG PRIVATE LIMITED

…CLAIMANT

V/S.
CAIRN INDIA LIMITED MERGED INTO VEDANT INDIA PVT.
LTD . AND OTHER
…..RESPONDENTS

INDEX

Sr. Particulars Page No.

No.
1. Statement of claim on behalf of Kanade
Anand Udyog Pvt. Ltd
2. List of Documents
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Advocate for the Claimants

7