V.SREENIVAS REDDY Vs. B.L.RATHNAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision Petition (CRP) arises out of an order dtd. 2/7/2024 passed by the XXIV Additional Civil Judge, City Civil Court, at Hyderabad ('Trial Court') in a petition filed by the petitioner under Sec. 27 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the purpose of issuing summons to the witnesses in terms of an order passed by the Arbitral Tribunal on 7/4/2024.

(2.) The learned Judge disposed of the Arbitration Original Petition (AOP.No.527 of 2024) by directing the office of the Court to re-submit the record to the Arbitral Tribunal. The Learned Judge considered the report of the Bailiff of the District and Sessions Court, Bengaluru Rural District, recording that both the witnesses were called absent on the returnable date despite service of summons. The Court accordingly closed the case by recording that the evidence could not be taken.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner (the claimant in the arbitration) submits that the Court should have taken steps under Order XVI Rule 10 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) and issued appropriate directions. Counsel submits that the Court was under a bounden duty to secure the presence of the 2 witnesses and render complete justice in the matter which the Court failed to do. Counsel submits that this is a fit case for revision of the order passed by the Trial Court.