OMNIA TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD. versus W.M.A. VAN LOOSBROEK

Citation: [2011] 3 S.C.R. 711 · Decided: 03-03-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: T.S. THAKUR · Disposal: Case Allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2011] 3·$.C.R. 711 
I 
OMNIA TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD. 
v. 
W.M.A. VAN LOOSBROEK 
(Arbitration Petition No.10 of 2010) 
MARCH 3, 2011 
[T.S. THAKUR, J.] 
ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996: 
A 
B 
ss. 11 (6) and (9) - Petition for appointment of arbitrator-
c 
HELD: In view of consent of respondent, all disputes including 
existence of arbitrable disputes, referred to the sole arbitrator, 
nominated. 
An agreement was entered into between the parties 
on 14.1.2008 whereby the petitioner, an Indian company, 
D 
appointed the respondent, a Dutch citizen, as its 
marketing representative to promote sale of its products 
in European market. The agreement was terminated by 
the parties in terms of another agreement dated 29.2.2008. 
The Indian company filed the instant petition u/ss 11 (6) 
E 
and (9) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for 
appointment of an arbitrator contending that the 
respondent committed violation of original agreement as 
the obligation cast upon him under clause 13 thereof was 
not discharged by him which gave rise to arbitrable 
F 
disputes. The respond~nt filed counter affidavit. 
Ultimately, the respondent consented to the appointment 
of an arbitrator for adjudication of all issues including the 
existence of arbitrable disputes ·by the arbitrator so 
appointed. 
G 
Allowing the petition, the Court 
HELD: All disputes between the parties relating to 
711 
H 
712 
SUPREME COURT R~PORTS 
[2011] 3 S.C.R. 
A and arising out of agreement dated 14-1-2008 and 
termination agreement dated 29-2-2008 including Clause 
4 thereof are referred to the sole Arbitrator nominated. 
The parties are directed to appear before the Arbitrator 
B 
c 
on 2-4-2011. [para 7] [716-G-H] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICITION : Arbitration Petition 
No.10 of 2010. 
Under Section 11 (6) and (9) of the Arbitration & 
Conciliation Act, 1996. 
Deepak Dhingra, (for Animesh K. Sinha), Nikhil Jain for 
the Petitioner. 
U.U. Lalit, Ugen Tashi Bhuita, T. Sunder Ramanathan (for 
0 
M. P. Devanath for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
T.S. THAKUR, J. 1. The respondent is a Dutch citizen. 
He entered into an agreement dated 14th January, 2008 with 
E the petitioner-company whereby the latter appointed him as its 
marketing representative to promote sale of RFID Tags and 
Components manufactured by the petitioner-company in 
European market. Clause (1) of the agreement executed 
between the parties stipulated the terms on which the 
F respondent was to work as the petitioner's representative. It 
reads: 
"1. 
OMNIA does hereby appoint PIM as its 
Representative for Europe, and PIM hereby accepts 
the aforesaid appointment, upon the following 
G 
terms: 
H 
(a) 
PIM would market the Products manufactured by 
OMNIA, on an exclusive basis, to his clients in 
Europe, and would be responsible for obtaining the 
OMNIA TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD. v. W.M.A. VAN 
713 
LOOSBROEK [T.S. THAKUR, J.] 
business in the nature of contracts, for supply by 
A 
OMNIA. 
(b) 
(c) 
PIM would be the front-end, dealing with the clients 
in Europe, and OMNIA would be introduced as the 
Indian Parent Company. 
In all situations, PIM would be required to introduce 
the two parties to this Agreement, as a single entity, 
responsible for managing clients/prospective 
clients in the whole of Europe. 
(d) 
All proposals, documentation submitted, would be 
in the name of OMNIA as the Indian Parent 
Company, with PIM being reflected as Sole 
Representative in Europe." 
.B 
c 
2. The agreement in Clauses 2 and 3 thereof set out the 
D 
obligations which the respondent was to discharge and those 
to be discharged by the petitioner. Other conditions like 
remuneration etc. were also stipulated by the agreement 
including obligations cast upon the parties after termination of 
the agreement. Clause 13 of the agreement relevant in this 
E 
regard, reads: 
"13. Obligations Upon Termination 
(a} 
The termination of this agreement shall not affect 
F 
any liability of either party to the other, accruing prior 
to the date of termination, or arising out of this 
agreement. 
(b) 
Upon termination, PIM agrees to immediately 
discontinue the use of any trademarks or trade 
G 
names in whole or in part belonging to OMNIA. 
(c) 
After termination PIM shall not represent, and shall 
not continue any practices, which might take it, 
appear, that he is still an authorized OMNIA agent 
H 
714 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011) 3 S.C.R. 
and shall perma

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.