In a significant legal development, the Supreme Court of India has issued a ruling in the case of Bamu v. NSSPL regarding an arbitration clause. This case revolves around the transfer of intellectual property rights as per the Memorandum of Understanding between Dr. Bamu and NSSPL. Stay informed about the outcome of the arbitration process as both parties seek a fair resolution to their disputes.
Facts
- The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between Dr. Bamu and NSSPL included a clause (3.5) regarding the transfer of Intellectual Property Rights to Dr. Bamu.
- Disputes arose between the parties when a communication from Dr. Bamu kept a purchase order in favor of NSSPL in abeyance.
- The clause stated that the transfer of ownership would occur as mutually decided upon by both parties.
Also Read: Supreme Court Judgement: High Court’s Order Upheld in Case of [Respondent] v. [Petitioner]
Analysis
- The MoU contained an arbitration clause.
- The arbitration clause stated that all disputes and claims related to the MoU shall be discussed in good faith by nominated officers of each party.
- The purpose of the discussions is to resolve the disputes amicably.
- The arbitration process is a mandatory step before further legal actions can be pursued.
- A joint request by NSSPL and BAMU will be made for an eligible and competent person to act as an Arbitrator in the case.
- The Arbitrator will be selected based on their expertise and impartiality.
- The Arbitrator will preside over the dispute between NSSPL and BAMU and make a fair decision.
- The decision made by the Arbitrator will be binding on both parties.
Also Read: Enhancement of Compensation Awarded in Motor Vehicle Accident Case: Supreme Court’s Judgment
Decision
- The High Court dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the Petitioner as the MoU contained an arbitration clause.
- The seat/place of arbitration according to the MoU is Aurangabad.
- The Counsel for the Petitioner agreed to refer the issue to arbitration as per the MoU.
- Mr. Justice Pratap Hardas (Retd.) was appointed as the Sole Arbitrator upon joint request of the parties.
- The parties agreed to pay the Arbitrator fees as per the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
- The matter was disposed of accordingly by the Court.
- The Petitioner then filed the present SLP being aggrieved by the High Court’s decision.
- The Petitioner had filed a Writ Petition before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad bench.
- All disputes and claims are to be submitted to arbitration in Aurangabad if not resolved by both parties satisfactorily.
- The cost of appointing the arbitrator will be shared equally by the parties involved.
- The arbitration proceedings will be subject to the Indian Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996.
Also Read: Case on Constitutional Validity of Section 35AC with High Court Dismissal
Case Title: NIRMAL SOFTWARE SERVICE (P) LTD Vs. DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR MARTHWADA UNIVERSITY
Case Number: SLP(C) No.-030863 / 2018
