Delhi High Court - Orders
Trans Engineers India Private Limited vs Otsuka Chemicals (India) Private ... on 26 July, 2022
Author: Anup Jairam Bhambhani
Bench: Anup Jairam Bhambhani
$~38
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ O.M.P. (COMM) 310/2022 & I.A. 11536/2022
TRANS ENGINEERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Arvind Nigam, Senior Advocate
with Ms. Binsy Susan, Advocate, Ms.
Neha Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Amogh
Srivastava, Advocate, Ms. Palak
Kaushal, Advocate and Mr. Sitikantha
Sahu, Ms. Sushmita Sahu and Mr.
Narinder Kumar, representatives of
petitioner in-person.
versus
OTSUKA CHEMICALS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED
..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Amit Dhingra, Advocate with
Mr. Rahul Narayanan, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
ORDER
% 26.07.2022 I.A. No.11535/2022 (exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. Let requisite compliances be made within 01 week. Application stands disposed of.
O.M.P.(COMM.) 310/2022 By way of the present petition under section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996 ('A&C Act' for short) the petitioner seeks setting aside of Arbitral Award dated 07.03.2022 rendered by the learned Sole Arbitrator on disputes with the respondent.
2. At the outset, in response to the office objection that no application for condonation of delay has been filed, it is clarified that the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUNITA RAWAT Signing Date:29.07.2022 OMP (COMM.) 310/2022 Page 1 of 2 13:14:51 impugned award is dated 07.03.2022 and, as recited in para 50 of the petition, the limitation of 03 months to impugn the award ran-out when the court was in its summer recess; and the present petition was filed on the very first day post re-opening of the court on 02.07.2022.
3. Mr. Arvind Nigam, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has taken the court through the arbitral award, to submit that the learned Sole Arbitrator has: (i) ignored the purport and meaning of Minutes of Meeting dated 15.09.2016 which were the genesis of the transaction between the parties; (ii) has re-written the terms of contract by ignoring the original P&ID dated 26.07.2016,which contained the initial drawings describing the scope of work to be performed by the petitioner; and (iii) has proceeded to draw conclusions on the basis of evidence that was not on the record.
4. After hearing some submissions, the petitioner is directed to place on record a 03-page note succinctly crystallising the grounds of challenge and cross-referencing the pages and paragraphs of the impugned award and of the documents that were part of the arbitral record.
5. Mr. Amit Dhingra, learned counsel is present on behalf of the respondent on advance copy.
6. For the above purpose, re-notify on 25th August 2022.
ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J JULY 26, 2022 Ne Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUNITA RAWAT Signing Date:29.07.2022 OMP (COMM.) 310/2022 Page 2 of 2 13:14:51