Our Bureau
Mumbai
The Bombay High Court has finally given the decision over the long standing dispute between the Board of Control for Cricket in India and the now defunct Indian Premier League (IPL) franchise Kochi Tuskers Kerala. The court has finally upheld an arbitral award of over Rs. 538 crore in favour of the Kochi Tuskers ending the 14 year old dispute around the team’s sudden termination.
On Tuesday, June 17th, the High Court finally gave a ruling on the dispute. The bench consisting of a single judge, Justice R.I. Chagla, ruled that the court couldn’t re-examine the merits of the arbitral tribunal’s conclusions and thus it dismissed the challenge by the cricket board to the award.
“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 arbitrator’s conclusion that the BCCI’s termination of the Kochi franchise was a repudiatory breach of contract would call for no interference… this is based on a correct appreciation of the evidence on record,” the court observed.
The High Court also stated that BCCI had immediately waived a strict requirement that they required for furnishing a new bank guarantee before the deadline i.e., before March 2011. The cricket board continued to deal with the Tuskers and even accepted payments breaching the requirements for the guarantee.
This resulted in the dismissal of the board’s objection under the Indian Partnership Act. It also helped in keeping the validity of arbitration proceedings initiated by the co-owners of the franchise, Rendezvous Sports World (RSW). Since the court found no illegal patent or any error in the jurisdiction they have allowed Kochi Cricket Pvt. Ltd (KCPL) and RSW to withdraw Rs. 100 crore which was deposited earlier by the BCCI.
The whole dispute between the Kochi franchise and BCCI started back in 2011 when the team failed to produce a new 10% bank guarantee of around Rs. 156 crore for the next season. The reasons were speculated to be internal disputes amongst the owners alongside venue availability concerns, and regulatory delays.
