MAHESH NARAIN Vs. SH. SUBHASH CHAND CHADHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This First Appeal under Sec. 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is filed by the appellant/objector Mr. Mahesh Narain against the impugned judgment dated 23.12.2006 passed by the court below, whereby the court below has dismissed the objections of the appellant and upheld the 'Award' of the Arbitrator dated 12.10.2003.

(2.) I note that the appellant expired during the pendency of these proceedings and he has been substituted by his legal heirs, and therefore reference of the appellant/objector in this judgment; wherever the context so requires; will include reference to the legal heirs of the appellant/objector.

(3.) Right at the outset, I would like to put on record that the so called 'Award' dated 12.10.2003 is not an award in the sense of term as is legally understood. Actually, the Award dated 12.10.2003 is said by the Arbitrator and the respondent no.1 to be a consent agreement between the parties and just two words in the middle of the same are additionally written to call it an Award with the signatures of the Arbitrator. This Award will be referred to hereinafter as the first Award. The so called consent agreement in the form of consent Award is of just about six lines and rest of the page of the so called Award are the subsequent facts which took place thereafter i.e from 12.10.2003 to 17.10.200 Also, as stated below, the Arbitrator thereafter got an 'Award' typed on a stamp paper dated 24.12.2003 but dated the 'Award' as 12.10.200 In fact the Arbitrator on 24.12.2003 suo moto, in the absence of the parties to the 'Award' got the same registered before the Sub-Registrar. This formal Award is the second Award.