LAWS(CAL)-2019-7-193

KALYANI DE MONDAL Vs. SANJUKTA DAS

Decided On July 09, 2019
Kalyani De Mondal Appellant
V/S
Sanjukta Das Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Court : On 25th June, 2019 there was hearing and a record of it. Text of order dated 25th June, 2019 is reproduced below:- "Mr. Datta learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner in this arbitration petition for extension of time to conclude the reference. He submits, it would appear from particulars of proceedings in the reference that respondent obstructed conclusion of it by failing to appear. He seeks extension of time for the Tribunal to conclude the reference in making and publishing award.

(2.) So far as record in minutes of 9th sitting is concerned, it is an elaborate order of adjournment passed by two out of three arbitrators. Nothing was decided for or against either of the parties. That brings up for adjudication respondent's contention regarding bias based on minutes of 19th sittings 13th March, 2019. This minutes is last annexure to the application. It appears to have been signed by two out of three arbitrators. Respondent's nominee arbitrator did not put signature, or at least it is not appearing in the disclosure. Pending parties being heard on adjourned date regarding this omission of respondent's nominee arbitrator's signature not appearing in the disclosure, Court notices paragraphs 19 and 20 of the minutes, which are reproduced below:

(3.) Today Mr.Pal moves his client's application being GA 1460 of 2019, filed in the meantime. He wants to invoke sub-section (6) of section 29A , Arbitration and Conciliation Act , 1996. He again draws attention to minutes of 9th sitting held on 7th March, 2018, particularly to paragraphs 10 and 11. The paragraphs are reproduced below:-