Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Reacon Engineers (India) Pvt. Ltd vs Airforce Naval Housing Board & Anr on 18 February, 2021

Author: C.Hari Shankar

Bench: C.Hari Shankar

                          $~ 28(Original Side)
                          *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +     O.M.P. (COMM) 28/2021, I.A.s 959/2021, 960/2021, 961/2021 &
                                2233/2021
                                REACON ENGINEERS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.                    ..... Petitioner
                                                    Through:     Mr. Jayant Mehta, Adv. With Ms.
                                                                 Dibyadyuti Banerjee, Advs.

                                                    versus

                                AIRFORCE NAVAL HOUSING BOARD & ANR. ..... Respondents
                                            Through: Mr. Yoginder Handoo & Mr. Ashwin
                                                     Kataria, Advs.

                                CORAM:
                                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
                                        ORDER

% 18.02.2021 I.A. 961/2021 (under Section 151 of CPC, 1908 - for condonation of delay)

1. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of forty days in re- filing the petition is condoned.

2. The application stands allowed accordingly.

I.A. 960/2021(under Section 151 of CPC, 1908 - for exemption)

1. Subject to the petitioner filing legible copies of any dim documents on which it may seek to place reliance, within a period of four weeks from today, exemption is granted for the present.

2. The application is allowed.

O.M.P. (COMM) 28/2021, I.A. 959/2021(under Section 5 of Limitation Act read with Section 151 of CPC, 1908 & I.A. 2233/2021under Section 36(2) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996)

1. Issue notice returnable on 11th May, 2021. Notice is accepted, on behalf of the respondents, by Mr. Yoginder Handoo.

2. Response may be filed within a period of four weeks from today with advance copy to learned counsel for the petitioner, who may file rejoinder thereto, if any, within two weeks thereof.

3. One of the main contentions in this petition, filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, impugning an award dated 13th March, 2020, is that the petitioner was only a shareholder in M/s Omaxe Infrastructure and Construction Limited (OICL), even if the petitioner was a majority shareholder. As such, it is submitted, by Mr. Jayant Mehta, learned Counsel for the petitioner, that there was no privity of contract between the petitioner and the respondent.

4. Moreover, points out Mr. Mehta, the petitioner was not given an adequate opportunity of representation before the learned arbitrator. The record reveals that the petitioner was impleaded as a party in the arbitral proceedings only on 28th January, 2019, whereafter it appears that the matter proceeded without adequate opportunity to the petitioner to represent himself and being heard in the matter.

5. Without expressing any further opinion on the merits of the case, and in view of the aforesaid facts, till the next date of hearing, there shall be an ad interim stay of operation and enforcement of the impugned award dated 13th March, 2020.

6. Re-notify on 11th May, 2021.

C.HARI SHANKAR, J FEBRUARY 18, 2021 ss Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUNIL SINGH NEGI O.M.P. (COMM) 28/2021 Page 3 of 3 Signing Date:23.02.2021 21:08:07