Latest news with #JusticeRIChagla
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
5 hours ago
- Business
- Business Standard
Kochi Tuskers vs BCCI: The IPL dispute that ended in ₹538 crore court blow
Almost 14 years after it brought the Indian Premier League (IPL) to Kerala — only to be terminated a season later — the ghost of Kochi Tuskers Kerala has returned to haunt the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), now with a legal price tag of ₹538 crore. In a significant setback for the BCCI, the Bombay High Court has upheld arbitral awards totalling ₹537.5 crore in favour of the defunct franchise's parent company, Kochi Cricket Private Ltd (KCPL), and its principal stakeholder, Rendezvous Sports World (RSW). Justice RI Chagla, delivering the verdict, dismissed the BCCI's petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, reinforcing that courts cannot reappreciate evidence or sit in appeal over arbitral findings. 'BCCI's dissatisfaction as to the findings rendered... cannot be a ground to assail the award,' the court said. A team, a tax, a termination The Kochi franchise—one of two teams added during the BCCI's 2010 expansion — was born in controversy and proved to be short-lived. Even before it debuted in the 2011 IPL season, the consortium behind it was fighting battles on multiple fronts: infighting among shareholders, a PR disaster over its proposed name ('Indi Commandos'), and threats of relocation after disputes over Kerala's entertainment tax. Despite a middling on-field performance—six wins in 14 matches—the bigger implosion came off the field. KCPL failed to furnish a mandatory 10 per cent bank guarantee for the 2012 season, citing unresolved shareholding issues and regulatory delays. Still, BCCI continued accepting payments from the franchise well into mid-2011, creating what the court has now interpreted as an implicit waiver of strict compliance. By September 2011, the BCCI had had enough. It terminated the franchise for breach of agreement, citing non-submission of the guarantee. Players were redistributed via auction; unsold ones were paid out of an earlier bank guarantee, which the BCCI unilaterally encashed. Arbitral award, and its confirmation In 2012, KCPL and RSW moved to arbitration, claiming wrongful termination. By 2015, the arbitral tribunal ruled in their favour: ₹384 crore to KCPL for lost future profits and ₹153 crore to RSW for unjustified encashment of the bank guarantee. The BCCI challenged the award, arguing that the arbitrator exceeded his mandate and erred in awarding both profits lost and wasted expenditure—claims it said were duplicative and contrary to contract law. The Board also invoked provisions of the Indian Partnership Act to question the maintainability of RSW's claim. The High Court disagreed on every count. Justice Chagla found the arbitrator's reasoning 'based on a correct appreciation of the evidence,' and reiterated that the court's role under Section 34 is not to second-guess findings of fact or contractual interpretation, absent a glaring legal error. He further observed that the BCCI, by continuing to engage with the franchise and accept payments post-deadline, had effectively 'waived' strict enforcement of the bank guarantee clause.
&w=3840&q=100){kind=logo}
First Post
6 hours ago
- Business
- First Post
Big blow to BCCI as Kochi Tuskers win Rs 538 crore arbitral award in IPL termination case
The Bombay High Court has upheld a Rs 538 crore arbitral award in favour of Kochi Tuskers Kerala, ruling against the BCCI in the IPL franchise termination case. The court has rejected BCCI's challenge and granted the governing body six weeks to appeal. read more The Bombay High Court has ruled in favour of the former Indian Premier League (IPL) team Kochi Tuskers Kerala, handing a big blow to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) . The court upheld an arbitral award of over Rs 538 crore in favour of the Kochi franchise, which was terminated by the BCCI back in 2011. Kochi Tuskers had played just one IPL season in 2011 before being banned by the BCCI due to an alleged breach of the franchise agreement. The BCCI said that Kochi Cricket Private Limited (KCPL), which owned the team, had failed to submit a bank guarantee on time, which was required under the contract. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Also Read: ICC reportedly rejects BCCI's proposal to host WTC final in India However, Kochi Tuskers argued that there were other issues like stadium permissions and internal clearances, and that BCCI had still accepted payments and continued talks even after the deadline passed. The case went to arbitration in 2012, and in 2015, the tribunal ruled in favour of Kochi Tuskers. More from First Cricket It ordered BCCI to pay Rs 384 crore to KCPL and return Rs 153 crore to Rendezvous Sports World (RSW), the group that was originally awarded the franchise. BCCI challenged the decision in court, saying the arbitrator had gone beyond their powers and made legal errors in pronouncing the award. BCCI dealt with a major blow But the Bombay High Court has rejected BCCI's arguments. According to Bar and Bench, Justice RI Chagla said that the court cannot re-examine the merits of the dispute under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act and that BCCI's dissatisfaction with the findings was not enough to cancel the award. 'The jurisdiction of this Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is very limited. BCCI's endeavour to delve into the merits of the dispute, is in teeth of the scope of the grounds contained in Section 34 of the Act. BCCI's dissatisfaction as to the findings rendered in respect of the evidence and/or the merits cannot be a ground to assail the Award,' the court said. This ruling is one of the biggest financial setbacks for BCCI in IPL history and brings back attention to how the Kochi Tuskers saga was handled over a decade ago. The court has granted six weeks to the BCCI to file an appeal in the case.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
7 hours ago
- Business
- Business Standard
BCCI loses ₹538 cr case as Bombay HC upholds Kochi Tuskers arbitration
The Bombay High Court has upheld arbitral awards worth over ₹538 crore in favour of the now-defunct Indian Premier League (IPL) franchise, Kochi Tuskers Kerala. The ruling comes more than a decade after the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) terminated the franchise's contract, citing a breach of agreement, reported Bar and Bench. Delivering the verdict on Tuesday, Justice RI Chagla rejected BCCI's plea challenging the arbitral awards, reaffirming the limited scope of judicial intervention under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The single-judge bench ruled that the court cannot function as an appellate body over the arbitrator's conclusions. 'The jurisdiction of this court under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is very limited. BCCI's endeavour to delve into the merits of the dispute is in teeth of the scope of the grounds contained in Section 34 of the Act. BCCI's dissatisfaction as to the findings rendered in respect of the evidence and/or the merits cannot be a ground to assail the Award,' the court said. What is the dispute? The Kochi Tuskers franchise, originally awarded to a consortium led by Rendezvous Sports World (RSW), was later operated by Kochi Cricket Private Limited (KCPL). The team took part in the 2011 IPL season but was terminated by BCCI in September 2011. The reason: failure to furnish a 10 per cent bank guarantee, allegedly due to internal conflicts among the franchise owners. KCPL, however, maintained that the delay was caused by unresolved matters including stadium issues, regulatory approvals on shareholding, and a sudden reduction in the number of IPL matches. Despite these problems, the BCCI continued to engage with the franchise and even accepted multiple payments, only to cancel the contract later and encash an earlier guarantee submitted by RSW. Arbitration and award In 2012, both KCPL and RSW initiated arbitration proceedings. The tribunal, in 2015, ruled in their favour. It awarded ₹384 crore to KCPL for loss of profits and ₹153 crore to RSW for wrongful encashment of the bank guarantee—together exceeding ₹538 crore, along with interest and legal costs. BCCI had challenged the award, claiming the arbitrator exceeded his jurisdiction and misapplied legal principles. It also argued that KCPL's failure to provide the guarantee was a fundamental breach and that the damages awarded were excessive and went beyond contractual limitations. Additionally, BCCI contested the maintainability of RSW's claim under the Indian Partnership Act. What did the court say in its verdict? KCPL and RSW countered BCCI's claims by stating that the board had, through its continued interactions, effectively waived the guarantee deadline. They insisted that the franchise's termination was both unjustified and disproportionate. They also defended the tribunal's findings, calling them a fair interpretation of the evidence on record. Justice Chagla sided with the franchise. The court made it clear that the arbitrator's conclusion—that the BCCI's action amounted to a repudiatory breach of contract—did not warrant interference. 'The arbitrator's conclusion that the BCCI's termination of the Kochi franchise was a repudiatory breach of contract would call for no interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act,' the court held. "Just because a different view may be possible would not be a ground for interference with the award," it added. The judgment further clarified that the arbitrator rightly found that the BCCI had waived the requirement under Clause 8.4 of the Franchise Agreement regarding the bank guarantee for the 2012 season. 'Thus, based on these material facts and documents on record, the finding of the learned Arbitrator that BCCI waived the requirement under Clause 8.4 of the KCPL-FA for furnishment of bank guarantee for 2012 season on or before 22nd March, 2011 cannot be faulted,' the court added.
Time of India
9 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
Bombay HC rules in favour of Kochi Tuskers, upholds Rs 538 crore arbitral award against BCCI
File photo of the Bombay High Court. The Bombay High Court on Tuesday upheld arbitral awards totalling over Rs 538 crore in favour of the now-defunct Indian Premier League (IPL) franchise Kochi Tuskers, dismissing BCCI's challenge. Justice RI Chagla ruled that the court's jurisdiction under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is limited and it cannot function as an appellate authority over the arbitrator's findings. The dispute originated when BCCI terminated the Kochi Tuskers franchise in September 2011, citing their failure to provide a 10% bank guarantee amid internal ownership disputes. The franchise had participated in IPL 2011 under a consortium led by Rendezvous Sports World (RSW) and operated by Kochi Cricket Private Limited (KCPL). Go Beyond The Boundary with our YouTube channel. SUBSCRIBE NOW! KCPL had attributed the delay in furnishing the bank guarantee to unresolved issues including stadium availability, regulatory approvals on shareholding, and a reduction in IPL matches. Despite these delays, BCCI continued to engage with KCPL and accepted payments before terminating the franchise. "The jurisdiction of this Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is very limited. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Memperdagangkan CFD Emas dengan salah satu spread terendah? IC Markets Mendaftar Undo BCCI's endeavour to delve into the merits of the dispute is in teeth of the scope of the grounds contained in Section 34 of the Act. BCCI's dissatisfaction as to the findings rendered in respect of the evidence and/or the merits cannot be a ground to assail the Award." In 2012, both KCPL and RSW initiated arbitration proceedings, resulting in a 2015 tribunal ruling in their favour. The tribunal awarded Rs 384 crore to KCPL for loss of profits and Rs 153 crore to RSW for wrongful encashment of the bank guarantee, along with interest and legal costs. BCCI contested these awards, claiming the tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction and misapplied legal principles. They argued that KCPL's failure to provide the bank guarantee constituted a fundamental breach justifying termination. KCPL and RSW countered that BCCI had effectively waived the guarantee deadline through its conduct and that the termination was unjustified and disproportionate. They maintained the arbitrator's ruling was based on accurate evidence assessment. "The arbitrator's conclusion that the BCCI's termination of the Kochi franchise was a repudiatory breach of contract would call for no interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act." The Court found no grounds to interfere with the arbitral findings, emphasising that the possibility of a different view would not warrant interference with the award. "Thus, based on these material facts and documents on record, the finding of the learned Arbitrator that BCCI waived the requirement under Clause 8.4 of the KCPL-FA for furnishment of bank guarantee for 2012 season on or before 22nd March, 2011 cannot be faulted." BCCI have six weeks to challenge the judgement. Game On Season 1 kicks off with Sakshi Malik's inspiring story. Watch Episode 1 here
