{"id":229685,"date":"2009-12-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-12-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009"},"modified":"2016-01-11T09:34:32","modified_gmt":"2016-01-11T04:04:32","slug":"sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009","title":{"rendered":"Sharda Agro Agency vs Exclusive Commodities Limited on 7 December, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court<\/div>\n
Sharda Agro Agency vs Exclusive Commodities Limited on 7 December, 2009<\/div>\n
Bench: Anoop V.Mohta<\/div>\n
    ndm\n                                         1                                       arbpl.307.09 anr.sxw\n\n\n\n\n                                                                                     \n              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY\n                  ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION\n\n\n\n\n                                                          \n            ARBITRATION PETITION (LODGING) NO. 307 OF 2009\n\n                                WITH\n\n\n\n\n                                                         \n                  NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1702 OF 2009\n                                  IN\n            ARBITRATION PETITION (LODGING) NO. 307 OF 2009\n\n\n\n\n                                            \n    Sharda Agro Agency.\n                              ig                            ... PETITIONER\n          Vs.\n                            \n    Exclusive Commodities Limited.                          ... RESPONDENT\n\n                                   --------------\n    Mr. P.N. Mahajan with Vijay Singh Thakur for Petitioner.\n       \n\n\n    Ms. Krupa K. i\/b S.K. Jain and Associates for Respondent.\n    \n\n\n\n                                   --------------\n                                   CORAM  :  ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.\n<\/pre>\n
                                                     th
\n                                    DATE       :   07  December, 2009.\n<\/p>\n
    P.C.\n<\/p>\n
    1           The Petitioner has invoked Section 34 of the Arbitration and <\/p>\n
    Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Arbitration Act), thereby challenged <\/p>\n
                        th
\n    the award dated 17  April, 2006, but as there is a delay as contemplated <\/p>\n
    under Section 34 (2) of the Arbitration Act, the Notice of Motion is taken <\/p>\n
    out for condonation of delay of 9 \/ 14 days in filing Arbitration Petition as
\n                                                                            th
\n    claimed to have received a certified copy of the award on 10  December, <\/p>\n
    2008.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\n                                                          ::: Downloaded on - 09\/06\/2013 15:23:04 :::<\/span>\n     ndm\n                                            2                                 arbpl.307.09 anr.sxw\n\n\n\n\n                                                                                  \n                                                                  rd\n    2             Admittedly, the  Petitioner  applied  on 03   December, 2008. \n\n<\/pre>\n
    The Petition could not be filed within three months because of default on <\/p>\n
    the part of the Registered Clerk and ultimately, the Petition was filed on
\n          st
\n    21  March, 2009.  There was no application for condonation of delay filed <\/p>\n
    on that time.\n<\/p>\n
                  The relevant facts are as under :\n<\/p>\n
    3<\/span><\/p>\n
                              ig             th
\n                  An agreement dated 14  September, 2004 was entered into <\/p>\n
    between the parties for certain commodities.  The Petitioner had given in <\/p>\n
    writing the personal, the residential and the business details.\n<\/p>\n
    4             There   arose   dispute   between   the   parties.   Therefore, <\/p>\n
    pursuant to the Arbitration clause, the matter was  referred to National <\/p>\n
    Commodities   and   Derivatives   Exchange   Limited   (the   Tribunal).     The <\/p>\n
    Petitioner   never   appeared   before   the   Tribunal   though   served   on   the <\/p>\n
    address provided and\/or available on the record.  The sole Arbitrator has
\n                                th
\n    passed the award on 17   April, 2006 at Mumbai being agreed place of <\/p>\n
    the arbitration.\n<\/p>\n
    5             As there was no challenge to the award within limitation, the <\/p>\n
    Respondent   filed   an   Execution   Case   No.   4-B\/2008,   at   Mumbai   Court.\n<\/p>\n
    The Respondent got transfer the same for Execution at District Court, <\/p>\n
                                                          ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:23:04 :::<\/span>
\n     ndm
\n                                                     3                                    arbpl.307.09 anr.sxw<\/p>\n
    Itarsi, (M.P.).  The Petitioner has full knowledge of the said proceedings.\n<\/p>\n
    The   Petitioner   appeared   before   the   Executing   Court   and   sought <\/p>\n
    adjournments from time to time.\n<\/p>\n
    6                In the present Arbitration case, the claimants \/ Respondents
\n                                              th
\n    have filed an affidavit dated 11  May, 2007 mentioning about the transfer <\/p>\n
    of award alongwith certificate under Order XXI, Rule 6 of Civil Procedure <\/p>\n
    Code (CPC) to Itarsi Court, at (M.P.) for the Execution and the same is <\/p>\n
    pending there.   It is also stated that the award was duly served on the <\/p>\n
    Respondent   by   a   Registered   Post   with   acknowledge   at   the   postal <\/p>\n
    address so provided.   It is also stated that the registered copy returned <\/p>\n
    with the remarks “No claim” and therefore, returned to sender.  The same <\/p>\n
    postal receipt and acknowledgment \/ AD were annexed as Exhibit -1 to <\/p>\n
    the   said   affidavit.     It   is   not   in   dispute.     It   is   therefore   clear   that   the <\/p>\n
    Petitioner   was   fully   aware   of   the   proceedings   including   the   affidavit <\/p>\n
    whereby it is specifically mentioned about the sending of award upon the <\/p>\n
    address available to the Petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
    7                As per the General Clauses Act, Section 26 \/ 27 and even <\/p>\n
    otherwise,   if   the   party   not   claims   such   envelop   \/   packet   send   by   the <\/p>\n
    postal   department,   unless   proved   otherwise,   it   is   a   good   service. <\/p>\n
\n\n    Whether   this   amounts   to   receipt   of   the   award.     The   learned   counsel \n\n\n\n\n                                                                      ::: Downloaded on - 09\/06\/2013 15:23:04 :::<\/span>\n     ndm\n                                                 4                                   arbpl.307.09 anr.sxw\n\n\n\n\n                                                                                         \n<\/pre>\n
    appearing for the Petitioner has strongly relied on Section 34 (3) of the <\/p>\n
    Arbitration   Act   and   contended   that   knowledge   of   such   award   is <\/p>\n
    immaterial.     The   requirement   is   the   “receipt   of   the   Arbitral   Award”.\n<\/p>\n
    Therefore, the Petition so filed is well within the ambit of Section 34 (3) <\/p>\n
    and   definitely   within   120   days   from   the   actual   receipt   of   the   Arbitral <\/p>\n
    Award.\n<\/p>\n
    8<\/span><\/p>\n
                   Normally, the requirement of receipt of the Arbitral Award as <\/p>\n
    contended   need   no   discussion   as   provisions   are   clear.     However, <\/p>\n
    considering the peculiarity of the present case where the Respondents <\/p>\n
    sent the award and not by the Arbitrator by Registered Post, but the same <\/p>\n
    was   not   claimed   by   the   Petitioner.     The   section   no   where   debar   the <\/p>\n
    concerned attending parties to send the Arbitral Award to other side, as <\/p>\n
    none   present   before   the   Arbitral   Tribunal.     It   is   not   the   case   of   the <\/p>\n
    Petitioner that they had refused and\/or not claimed the award because it <\/p>\n
    was sent by the party.  There is no serious dispute even to the contents
\n                                         th
\n    of the said Affidavit dated 11   May, 2007, as the same was filed by the <\/p>\n
    Respondent to support their application to transfer the same alongwith <\/p>\n
    the certificate.\n<\/p>\n
    9              The purpose and object of the Arbitration Act, if we take note <\/p>\n
    of, in that case a co-operation of both the parties is a must at all the <\/p>\n
                                                                 ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:23:04 :::<\/span>
\n     ndm
\n                                                5                                   arbpl.307.09 anr.sxw<\/p>\n
    stages.   The parties having agreed for the Arbitration Clause, needs to <\/p>\n
    participate in the proceeding in case of disputes.   The dispute arose in <\/p>\n
    the   present   case.     Admittedly,   there   is   a   Arbitration   Clause.     The <\/p>\n
    Petitioner for whatever the reason failed to appear before the Tribunal <\/p>\n
    and inspite of knowledge of the award waited till December, 2008, and <\/p>\n
    thereafter, applied for the certified copy.  The award was already sent, but <\/p>\n
    not   claimed   in   the   year   2007   itself   by   the   Petitioner.     The   contention <\/p>\n
    cannot be accepted of the Petitioner that unless the Arbitrator sent that <\/p>\n
    award and the other party against whom the award is passed has not <\/p>\n
    received   the   Arbitral   Award,   such   party   is   not   bound   by   the   limitation <\/p>\n
    period as contemplated under Section 34 (3) of the Arbitration Act.  It will <\/p>\n
    frustrate the whole arbitration purpose and object.   In my view, the fact <\/p>\n
    that the Arbitral Award was sent and the same was not claimed.   The <\/p>\n
    award  is   deemed  to  have  been  served.     It  amounts   to  “receipt  of  the <\/p>\n
    Arbitral Award.”  The premium cannot be granted to the Petitioner for his <\/p>\n
    own default to say that they never received the Arbitral Award and now <\/p>\n
    the Petition as filed is within limitation from the receipt of the award.   In <\/p>\n
    my   view,   in   the   present   fact   and   circumstances   of   the   case,   it   is <\/p>\n
    necessary to hold that the Petitioner has received the Arbitral Award in <\/p>\n
    the year 2007 itself.  The Petitioner ought to have applied for the certified <\/p>\n
    copy   immediately.     There   is   nothing   pointed   out   whey   they   could   not <\/p>\n
    apply   for   certified   copy   earlier.     The   word   “receipt   the   Arbitral   Award” <\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\n                                                                ::: Downloaded on - 09\/06\/2013 15:23:04 :::<\/span>\n     ndm\n                                                 6                                   arbpl.307.09 anr.sxw\n\n\n\n\n                                                                                         \n<\/pre>\n
    cannot be read and or interpreted to mean that the Arbitral Award must <\/p>\n
    be received physically by the party in all such circumstances and it must <\/p>\n
    be sent only, by the Arbitrator and not by the other party.  In view of the <\/p>\n
    above,   I   am   not  inclined   to   accept   the   case   of   the   Petitioner   that   the <\/p>\n
    present Arbitration Petition as filed is within limitation from the receipt of
\n                                  th
\n    the certified copy on 10  December, 2008.  The Petition as filed is beyond <\/p>\n
    limitation of 120 days.   In view of above, there is no sufficient ground \/ <\/p>\n
    case for condonation of delay.\n<\/p>\n
    10             Resultantly, the Notice of Motion is dismissed.  In the result <\/p>\n
    Petition is also dismissed on the ground of limitation only.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n
                                                              [ ANOOP V. MOHTA, J ] <\/p>\n
                                                                 ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:23:04 :::<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court Sharda Agro Agency vs Exclusive Commodities Limited on 7 December, 2009 Bench: Anoop V.Mohta ndm 1 arbpl.307.09 anr.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION (LODGING) NO. 307 OF 2009 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1702 OF 2009 IN ARBITRATION PETITION (LODGING) NO. 307 OF […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-229685","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSharda Agro Agency vs Exclusive Commodities Limited on 7 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sharda Agro Agency vs Exclusive Commodities Limited on 7 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-12-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-11T04:04:32+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sharda Agro Agency vs Exclusive Commodities Limited on 7 December, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-11T04:04:32+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1087,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Bombay High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009\",\"name\":\"Sharda Agro Agency vs Exclusive Commodities Limited on 7 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-11T04:04:32+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sharda Agro Agency vs Exclusive Commodities Limited on 7 December, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sharda Agro Agency vs Exclusive Commodities Limited on 7 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sharda Agro Agency vs Exclusive Commodities Limited on 7 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-12-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-11T04:04:32+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sharda Agro Agency vs Exclusive Commodities Limited on 7 December, 2009","datePublished":"2009-12-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-11T04:04:32+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009"},"wordCount":1087,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Bombay High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009","name":"Sharda Agro Agency vs Exclusive Commodities Limited on 7 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-12-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-11T04:04:32+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sharda-agro-agency-vs-exclusive-commodities-limited-on-7-december-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sharda Agro Agency vs Exclusive Commodities Limited on 7 December, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/229685","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=229685"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/229685\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=229685"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=229685"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=229685"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}