SUVIDHA INFRACON PVT LTD Vs. INTEC CAPITAL LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) None appears for the respondent in spite of pass-over. The reply has not been filed by the respondent. Even the Arbitral Record has not been filed by the Arbitrator.

(2.) This petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') challenges the Arbitral Award dated 16.06.2017 passed by the Sole Arbitrator adjudicating the disputes that had arisen between the parties in relation to the Agreement dated 03.03.2012 executed between the petitioner and the respondent. The Arbitrator, by way of the Impugned Award has directed as under:

(3.) The primary submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner in challenge to the Impugned Award is that the petitioner was never served with the notice invoking the arbitration or the arbitration proceedings and the petitioner gained knowledge of the arbitration proceedings only when a copy of the Award was sent to the petitioner by the Arbitrator. He further submits that even a perusal of the Award would show that the petitioner was never served with a notice of the arbitration proceedings and in spite of the postal report that the notice could not be served on the petitioner, the Arbitrator considered it as deemed service, observing as under: