INDIAN POTASH LTD. Vs. BOHRA INDUSTRIES LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner/Non-applicant, by the instant revision petition under Sec. 115 CPC, has laid challenge to order dtd. 5/4/2016 passed by Addl. District Judge No. 2, Udaipur (for short, 'learned Court below'). The learned Court below, by the impugned order, rejected petitioner's application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC in a petition under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as 'Act'), for setting aside arbitral award, filed on behalf of non petitioner/ applicant.

(2.) Succinctly stated, facts of the case are that there existed business relations between rival parties and during subsistence of these relations a dispute cropped up. Considering the dispute arbitrable, on behalf of petitioner an application under Sec. 11 of the Act is preferred before High Court of Delhi. After hearing the application, Delhi High Court appointed Retd. Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court Shri Mukul Mudgal as sole arbitrator. Likewise, non-petitioner/applicant too made endeavour to agitate its cause before this Court for referring the dispute to the arbitrator. This Court, vide judgment/order dated 8th of August, 2012, disposed of non-petitioner's application under Sec. 11 of the Act. Order dtd. 8/8/2012 reads as under:

(3.) As per agreed order dtd. 8/8/2012, the sole arbitrator conducted arbitral proceedings at Delhi and followed all procedures/norms in adherence of Delhi High Court Arbitration Centre Rules. The sole arbitrator also charged his fee as per Delhi Rules. Upon conclusion of the proceedings, sole arbitrator passed award on 21/8/2015 whereby claim of the non-petitioner was repudiated and counter-claim of the petitioner is partly accepted. Feeling dismayed with the arbitral award dated 21st of August, 2015, non-petitioner Bohra Industries Ltd. approached District Judge, Udaipur for setting aside arbitral award by invoking Sec. 34 of the Act. Subsequently, the petition under Sec. 34 of the Act, submitted by the non-petitioner, was transferred for disposal to the learned Court below.