RITES LTD. Vs. APEX CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner (hereafter 'RITES') has filed the present petition under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter 'the A&C Act'), inter alia, impugning the orders dtd. 28/9/2019 and 20/12/2019 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal.

(2.) By the order dtd. 28/9/2019, the Arbitral Tribunal noted that RITES was also a Power of Attorney holder of Delhi Police (respondent no.2) and held that since it had, acting as an agent of respondent no. 2, proceeded with the defence in arbitration without the independent participation of respondent no.2, it could not insist on separate participation by respondent no.2. Further, the Arbitral Tribunal also observed that participation of respondent no. 2 was optional. The Arbitral Tribunal directed the parties to submit the claims and counter-claims by 8/10/2019.

(3.) By the impugned order dtd. 20/12/2019, the Arbitral Tribunal rejected the application of RITES to separately implead respondent no.2 principally on two grounds. First, that the reference required the Arbitral Tribunal to decide the disputes between respondent no.1 and RITES, which was defending the claims on behalf of respondent no. 2. And second, that RITES had also proceeded with submitting the Statement of Defence; submission of counter-claims; acceptance and denial of documents; and submission of draft issues.