YUSUFKHAN Vs. PRAJITA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admit. Respondents waive service. By consent of the parties, the Arbitration Petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal.

(2.) This Arbitration Petition has been filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short "the Act") challenging the order dated 31st May, 2018 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal (for short the "impugned order") under Section 17 of the Act. By the impugned order, the Tribunal directed the petitioner to furnish an undertaking to the effect that he will not alienate or encumber or part with possession of the property which was the subject-matter of the arbitration to the extent of Rs.25 crores till the arbitration proceedings are concluded. It was further clarified that this undertaking shall be in respect of a specific property i.e. certain specific portion of the developed property that falls to the share of the petitioner or any other unencumbered personal property of the petitioner.

(3.) At the outset, when I went through the impugned order, I found that there are several inconsistencies therein. I was therefore inclined to set aside the impugned order and remand it back to the Arbitral Tribunal for a fresh decision. However, both the learned Senior Counsel appearing in the matter (for the petitioner as well as respondent No.1 - the contesting respondent) stated before me that they do not seek a remand and would rather have me decide whether the order passed by the Tribunal is justified or otherwise. It is in these circumstances that I have proceeded to hear the present Arbitration Petition.