(1.) Arbitral proceedings between the petitioner Maruti Traders and the respondent, conducted by a 3-member Arbitral Tribunal, have resulted in a nil award. All claims of the petitioner, as the claimant before the learned Arbitral Tribunal, stand rejected. Understandably chagrined at this, the petitioner has approached this Court under Sec. 34[ 1. 34. Application for setting aside arbitral award.-
(2.) I have heard Mr. Ramesh Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Abhijit Mittal, learned Counsel for the respondent, at considerable length. A brief background of the facts
(3.) The petitioner was authorised, by the respondent, to work as a non-exclusive dealer of domestic and bulk water meters and accessories, manufactured by the respondent, in Chhattisgarh. The petitioner relies, for this purpose, on four dealership authorizations issued by the respondent on 1/1/2009, 1/1/2010, 1/8/2011 and 1/1/2012. Though the third and fourth authorisations, dtd. 1/8/2011 and 1/1/2012, were in the name of the petitioner, the first two authorisations, dtd. 1/1/2009 and 1/1/2010, were in favour of Mahamaya Constructions and Agni Enterprises respectively. The petitioner, however, claims that Mahamaya Constructions and Agni Enterprises were its own sister companies, though this assertion has been disputed by the respondent. As no submission to this effect was advanced by the respondent before this Court, I will proceed on the premise that all authorizations pertained to the petitioner.