Supreme Court - Daily Orders
M/S Indian Farmers Fertilizer ... vs M/S Bhadra Products on 25 November, 2022
Bench: Surya Kant, Vikram Nath
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL No.8886 OF 2022
(Arising out of SLP(C)No.20504 of 2022)
M/S INDIAN FARMERS FERTILIZER COOPERATIVE LTD. … APPELLANT
Versus
M/S BHADRA PRODUCTS … RESPONDENT
O R D E R
1. Issue notice.
2. Mr. Rahul Chitnis, learned counsel accepts notice on
behalf of the sole respondent. Service upon the said respondent
is, accordingly, waived of.
3. Leave granted.
4. We have heard Mr. K.K. Venugopal, learned Senior Counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Mr. Rahul Chitnis,
learned counsel, who appears on caveat on behalf of the respondent.
5. The appellant has laid challenge to the judgment and
order dated 13.10.2022 passed by the High Court of Orissa at
Cuttack whereby the respondent has been permitted to lead
additional evidence in the proceedings under Section 34 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
satish kumar yadav
Date: 2022.11.29
`the Act’), which are pending before the learned District Judge,
20:01:43 IST
Reason:
Jagatsinghpur.
2
6. In our considered view, the High Court ought not to have
passed the impugned order allowing the respondent to lead
additional evidence when the matter under Section 34 of the Act is
pending consideration before the learned District Judge. The
appropriate recourse for the respondent would be to make all the
submissions before the learned District Judge as to in what
circumstances it could not lead evidence before the learned
Arbitrator and/or that the Arbitrator did not give sufficient
opportunities to lead evidence. Such a plea, being essentially a
question of fact, shall be considered by the learned District Judge
while finally deciding the matter under Section 34 of the Act.
7. Consequently, the impugned judgment dated 13.10.2022
passed by the High Court is set aside, leaving it open to the
learned District Judge to consider all the submissions and pass an
appropriate order while adjudicating the proceedings under Section
34 of the Act. Learned District Judge may hear and decide the
proceedings expeditiously.
8. It is clarified that we have not expressed any views on
the merits of the case.
9. The appeal is allowed accordingly.
.........................J.
(SURYA KANT)
..............…….........J.
(VIKRAM NATH)
NEW DELHI;
NOVEMBER 25, 2022.
3
ITEM NO.15 COURT NO.11 SECTION XI-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).20504/2022
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-10-2022
in WP(C) No.18536/2022 passed by the High Court of Orissa at
Cuttack)
M/S INDIAN FARMERS FERTILIZER COOPERATIVE LTD. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
M/S BHADRA PRODUCTS Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION)
Date : 25-11-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH
For Petitioner(s) Mr. K.K. Venugopal, Sr.Adv.
Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR
Mr. Alok Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Garima Soni, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Pandit, Adv.
Ms. Neetu Rahi, Adv.
Mr. Rishabh Dua, Adv.
Ms. Somya Yadava, Adv.
Mr. Manan Gambhir, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Rahul Chitnis, Adv.
Ms. Shwetal Shepal, Adv.
Mr. Chander Shekhar Ashri, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Issue notice.
2. Mr. Rahul Chitnis, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the sole respondent. Service upon the said respondent is, accordingly, waived of.
3. Leave granted.
4. The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
(SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.) DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT MASTER (NSH) (Signed order is placed on the file) 4