SURINDER KUMAR PRUTHI Vs. UDAN CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . Heard learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner. It appears that only Surinder Kumar Pruthi filed objection to the award within the stipulated time of 30 days. The objector claims that the claimant manipulated and misused the blank papers. The objector opted not to appear before the learned arbitrator despite notices dated 17th February 1996, 2nd March 1996 and 23rd March 1996. However, Surinder Kumar Pruthi sent letter dated 24th February 1996 received by the Arbitrator on 24th May 1996. The said letter indicates that certain payments had been made. Excepting the payment of Rs.2,800.00 all the payments had been accounted for in the ledger. The appellant failed to appear before the learned Arbitrator to prove the payment of Rs.2,800.00 on 11th November 1994. In so far as non-encashment of cheque No. 825914 dated 27th December 1994 for a sum of Rs.65,000.00 is concerned, the learned Arbitrator considered it in the light of the ledger of the claimant and certificate dated 14th May 1997 placed on record about encashment of the said cheque on 17th April 1995. Shri Surender Kumar Pruthi executed promissory note on 27th December 1994 along with guarantors. The fact that the appellant chose not to appear before the learned Arbitrator itself indicated that the petitioner was interested to forestall the arbitration proceedings.

(2.) . The learned trial court by its order dated 29th September 1997 rejected the contention of the appellant and made the award rule of the court.

(3.) . An appeal was filed against that order and that was also dismissed.