Punjab National Bank vs M/S Shri Ram Raja Sarkar Lok Kalyan Trust on 18 May, 2023

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Punjab National Bank vs M/S Shri Ram Raja Sarkar Lok Kalyan Trust on 18 May, 2023

1. The instant petition under Section 27 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter "the Act") read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

(a) pass the appropriate orders/directions for summoning and recording the Evidence of Mr Arun Singh Rawat, Deputy Director (E&U), Unique Identification Authority of India, 2nd Floor, Tower-I, Jeevan Bharti Building, Connaught Circus, New Delhi - 110001 or any other concerned person in the pending arbitral proceedings between the Petitioner and the Respondent before the Hon'ble Sole Arbitrator Shri K. K. Lahoti Justice (Retd.);

(b)Any other order as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2023 at 13:34:01 proper in the present facts and circumstances of the case."

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the instant petition is being filed on behalf of petitioner for appropriate orders/directions for summoning and recording evidence of Mr. Arun Singh Rawat (Deputy Director (E&U)), or any other concerned personnel of Unique Identification Authority of India (hereinafter referred to as "UIDAI"), who is well versed with facts and circumstances of the matter especially in respect of the work awarded to the respondent in the arbitral proceedings between the parties before the learned Sole Arbitrator. It is submitted that the UIDAI is the principal contractor, who has appointed the petitioner as Registrar and the respondent as Enrolment Agencies which shall carry out Know Your Resident (KYR) demographic data and biometric data collection from the residents.

3. It is submitted that the parties have acted as per guidelines of UIDAI. The works of the petitioner and the respondent was under the supervision of the UIDAI. The claim of the respondent is based on the letter dated 11th May, 2015 issued by Mr. Arun Singh Rawat, Deputy Director (E&U), UIDAI.

4. It is submitted that the petitioner bank awarded a Work Order to the respondent vide its letter dated 24th November, 2012 for enrolment of residents for Aadhar Unique Number under UID project. The respondent was not carrying out the UID project as per enrolment Letter dated 24th November, 2012 and failed to achieve the targets allotted in various States Union Territories as per specification issued by UIDAI. The UIDAI levied huge penalty upon the respondent on account of delay in uploading, This is a digitally signed order.

5. It is submitted that a Notice invoking Arbitration dated 27th January, 2018 as per the Clause 8.2 of the Standard Terms of Contract. Subsequently, the respondent moved petition under Section 11 of the Act before this Court seeking appointment of an Arbitrator. UIDAI was deleted from the array of parties vide Order dated 29th January 2019 passed by this Court in Arb. P. No 681 of 2018 stating that there was no privity to the contract between the parties and referred the matter to the learned Sole Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes between the parties.

6. It is further submitted that the petitioner bank preferred an application before the Arbitral Tribunal for seeking permission to move an application before this Court under section 27 of the Act. The same was allowed vide order dated 5th April 2023 by the Arbitral Tribunal.

7. It is, thus, prayed that this Court may pass appropriate order under Section 27 of the Act since the evidence of above said witness is necessary for just and proper adjudication of the matter pending before the learned Arbitral Tribunal. It is furthermore submitted that the petition is with bona fide intent and will cause no prejudice to the respondent, if the petition is allowed.

8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has no objection if the instant petition is allowed.

9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

10. By way of the instant petition, the petitioner is seeking summoning and recording of evidence of one Mr. Arun Singh Rawat (Deputy Director (E&U)), or any other concerned personnel of UIDAI on the ground that the evidence of the said persons is necessary for proper adjudication of the This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2023 at 13:34:02 proceedings before the learned Arbitral Tribunal.

11. In view of the contentions raised in the petition, the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner and no objection on behalf of the respondent, this Court is inclined to allow the instant petition and the reliefs sought therein.

12. Accordingly, this Court directs summoning and recording of evidence of Mr. Arun Singh Rawat, Deputy Director (E&U), UIDAI or any other concerned personnel of UIDAI before the Sole Arbitrator.

13. In terms of the aforesaid directions, the instant petition stands disposed of along with pending applications, if any.

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J MAY 18, 2023 gs/db Click here to check corrigendum, if any This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2023 at 13:34:02

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders