MANAGING DIRECTOR Vs. PROPRIETOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners who are plaintiffs have filed the present writ petitions calling in question the order passed in Arbitration Suit No.3/2013 dated 11.04.2018, whereby the application, I.A.II filed by the plaintiffs under Order XVI Rule 1 r/w Section 151 of C.P.C. seeking issuance of witness summons to 16 witnesses named in the application and also on the application filed and numbered as I.A.IV under Order VI Rule 17 r/w Section 151 of C.P.C. seeking amendment of the plaint, which have come to be dismissed.

(2.) The parties are referred to by their ranks in the Arbitration Suit for the purpose of convenience.

(3.) The plaintiffs had filed Arbitration Suit No.3/2013 under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act' ) seeking to set aside the arbitration award rendered by defendant No.2 in case No.RCB/ZP/CR.07/2010-2011 dated 15.4.2013. The facts that have been made out are that defendant No.1 being a supplier of food grains had submitted a bill dated 01.09.2009 for Rs. 2,03,44,800/- arising out of supply of Toor Dal in connection with Mid-Day Meals Scheme. Plaintiff No.2 had invited tenders for supply of Toor Dal in various Districts for the months of June, July, August and September, 2009 and in response to the same, defendant No.1 submitted his tender for supply of Toor Dal for Belagavi District. It is the allegation of the plaintiffs that the tenderer had not supplied the requisite quality and quantity of Toor Dal and in fact had played fraud by sending good quality of Toor Dal for scientific verification, while the one that was supplied was of inferior quality. Defendant No.1 claimed that he had supplied 2768 quintals of Toor Dal for the months of August and September, 2009 and submitted bills for payment of Rs. 2,03,44,800/-. The bill having been rejected, defendant No.1 had approached the Arbitrator and a case came to be registered as No. RCB/ZP/CR.07/2010-2011.