MANJUL DEB Vs. VIDEOCON INDUSTRIES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. T.J. Mahanta, learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner, I have also heard Mr. D.K. Das, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

(2.) In this revision petition the order dated 02.07.2013 passed by the learned District Judge, Cachar, Silchar in Misc. (Arb) Case No.09/2012 rejecting the prayer made by the petitioner seeking leave to adduce evidence in support of the grounds taken in the application filed by him under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter "Act of 1996") has been put under challenge.

(3.) The case of the petitioner, in a nutshell, is that he was one of the parties to the arbitration proceeding initiated at the instance of the respondents. After receipt of notice issued by the sole arbitrator, the petitioner has raised objection, inter alia, questioning the competence and jurisdiction of the arbitrator to entertain the dispute. However, the petitioner did not appear before the arbitrator to contest the proceeding. The arbitration proceeding was taken forward and eventually, arbitral award dated 19.04.2012 was passed by the sole arbitrator awarding the claims of the respondents. Being aggrieved, the petitioner had approached the court of learned District Judge, Cachar at Silchar by filing Misc. (Arb.) Case No.09/2012 by filing an application under Section 34 of the Act of 1996, praying for setting aside the arbitral award dated 19.04.2012. In the said proceeding, the petitioner had also filed a separate application dated 01.06.2013 seeking leave of the court to lead evidence, which prayer was rejected by the impugned order dated 2.7.2013. Hence, this petition.