N D M C Vs. RAKESH KUMAR SHUKLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff filed an application under Sections 13 and 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for making the award dated 29th January, 2001, made by Shri D.V. Kapoor, a Rule of the Court. Defendant is a dealer of aquarium and fishes and accessories associated with it and has wide experience in the said field. Plaintiff NDMC entered into an agreement with the defendant on 14th June, 1985, initially for a period of three years, to be extended later, on fulfillment of certain conditions contained in the agreement, for maintenance of ten aquariums displayed for public viewing at Grotto, Children park, India Gate, New Delhi in exchange of a space for a sale counter to remain in exclusive possession of the defendant at the back of the display aquariums inside Grotto, Children Pak, India Gate. After the expiry of three years, NDMC issued a letter dated 5th May, 1988, followed by another letter dated 26th September, 1988 and called upon the defendant to vacate the premises. Defendant filed a civil suit in the District Court seeking restraint order against the NDMC from dispossessing him from the said premises.

(2.) Vide order dated 5th October, 1988, the Civil Court ordered NDMC to maintain status quo in respect of the premises in question. Disputes and differences arose inter se the parties relating to extension/renewal of the agreement and for payment of Rs.10,000/- against the supply of aquariums; which was to be made to the defendant by the plaintiff. Defendant wrote a letter to the Administrator, NDMC asking him to refer the dispute between the parties to arbitration under clause 15 of the agreement. Since Administrator refused to refer the dispute, defendant filed a petition being Suit No.961A/1990 under Section 20 of the Act before this Court for appointment of an Arbitrator and for referring the disputes to him for adjudication. Vide order dated 11th July, 1990, this Court directed the plaintiff to maintain status quo with respect to the possession of the suit premises and maintenance of aquariums with further direction to the Administrator, NDMC to appoint an Arbitrator and refer the disputes to him.

(3.) In compliance of the orders of this Court, plaintiff appointed Shri D.V.Kapoor, Advocate as the sole Arbitrator, who passed his award on 29th January, 2001. NDMC filed this case for making the said award a Rule of the Court. On receipt of notice, defendant has filed objections challenging the validity of the award on the grounds that Arbitrator misconducted himself by entertaining the counter-claim filed by the plaintiff and considering the same while making the impugned award. He also challenged the merits of the award on the grounds that Arbitrator did not properly appreciate the terms and conditions of the agreement, the evidence of the respondents and also by considering that plaintiff had already given him adjustment of Rs.10,000/- out of the total sum awarded in favour of the plaintiff. He has prayed that the award, being against principles of natural justice, be set aside.