(1.) Against the order rejecting 26 applications under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by them, the Railways/appellants have filed 26 appeals. The respondent/claimant has filed 26 cross-objections thereto. The Railways/appellants have filed 26 appeals against the order of the learned Single Judge passed under Sec. 11 of the said Act.
(2.) 1. All these appeals involve identical questions of law and fact arising out of alleged 26 contracts between the same parties. Therefore, by consent of the parties, all these appeals were heard analogously. The learned Counsel for the respective parties advocated the cause of their respective clients through elaborate argument for days together. Various intrinsic questions of law depending upon the facts revealed have since been raised. Instead of referring to the respective arguments separately, we would propose to deal with the points raised one after the other referring to the arguments relevant to the particular point and the decisions cited by the respective Counsel to support their respective contentions.
(3.) 2. In order to appreciate the relevant points raised and the arguments made by the respective Counsel, we may refer to the common facts involved in all these appeals in brief. At the same time, we may also indicate that we had the pleasant opportunity of hearing one of the most erudite arguments by the respective Counsel for both the parties. We are not oblivion of the fact that more erudite the argument is, more the confusion created. Facts :