K. C. MEHRA Vs. SATISH MEHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (The Act) to challenge the award dated 24.12.1998 made by the sole arbitrator respondent no. 1 Sh. Satish Mehra. The petitioner Sh. K.C. Mehra, respondent no.1-Sh. Satish Mehra, respondent no. 2 Sh. P.N. Mehra and respondent no. 7 Sh. P.R. Malhotra are sons of Late Sh. Dinanath Mehra. Respondent no. 3 is the wife of Sh. P.N. Mehra, respondent no. 2. Respondent nos. 4, 5 and 6 namely Sh. Pawan Mehra, Sh. Sanjay Mehra and Sh. Sandeep Mehra are the sons of Late Sh. A.N. Mehra, who was the son of Sh. Dinanath Mehra. The petitioner states that Late Sh. Dinanath Mehra who had seven sons partitioned the property which he possessed among his family members by a duly registered partition deed dated 26.08.1955 registered before the Sub-Registrar, Delhi on 09.01.1957. Late Sh. Dinanath Mehra expired in the year 1961. In 1981, Sh. R.N. Mehra, i.e. respondent no. 2, filed a Suit for partition before this court being Suit No. 282/1981. The other six brothers were arrayed as defendants. He sought partition of the movable and immovable properties belonging to the parties and claimed 1/7th share in such properties. On 09.03.1987 the parties to the suit entered into a compromise and moved an application under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC being I.A. No. 1522/1987. The court recorded the statements of the parties and the suit was disposed off in terms of the compromise. The petitioner states that attempts made by two brothers namely Sh. Suresh Mehra and Late Sh. A.N. Mehra to challenge the compromise decree by filing I.A. Nos. 1741-42/1987 (by Suresh Mehra) and suit no. 1143/1985 (by Late Sh. A.N. Mehra) were not pursued and were dismissed for non prosecution on 01.09.1998 and 23.03.1999 respectively.

(2.) THE petitioner states that he was shocked to receive a communication from one Sh. Vinod Kumar, Advocate, c/o Kumar and Company, Advocates, stating that respondent no.1 had been appointed as an Arbitrator by consent of some of the brothers, including the petitioner and that respondent no. 1 had made an award on 24.12.1998, a copy of which was enclosed with the said communication. It was also informed that Sh. Satish Mehra, respondent no.1 had got the award registered before the Sub-Registrar Paharganj, New Delhi. The petitioner states that he had never entered into any arbitration agreement with anyone appointing respondent no.1 as an Arbitrator. There was no occasion to appoint an Arbitrator as all disputes had been fully and finally settled between the brothers vide compromise dated 09.03.1987 in Suit No.282/1981. The petitioner alleged forgery by respondent no.1 by misusing a blank signed paper of the brothers including the petitioner. The petitioner states that the suit earlier filed by Sh. P.N. Mehra for partition was only in respect of a few properties namely :

(3.) HE further submits that the factum of the brothers having signed blank papers earlier had been recorded in the compromise application and it had then been agreed that neither party would use such blank signed papers. The petitioner refers to para 2 of the compromise application namely I.A. No. 1522/1987 which reads as under: