Delhi High Court - Orders
Punjab National Bank vs M/S Shri Ram Raja Sarkar Lok Kalyan Trust on 1 May, 2023
Author: Chandra Dhari Singh
Bench: Chandra Dhari Singh
$~32
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ O.M.P. (E) (COMM.) 16/2023
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. S.K. Sharma, Advocate
versus
M/S SHRI RAM RAJA SARKAR LOK KALYAN TRUST
..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Anukul Raj, Mr. Anubhav Deep
Singh, Mr. Tushar Bhalla and Ms.
Nikita Raj, Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH
ORDER
% 01.05.2023
I.A. 8401/2023 (Exemption)
Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
O.M.P. (E) (COMM.) 16/2023
1. The instant petition under Section 27 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter "The Act, 1996") has been filed on behalf of petitioner seeking the following relief:-
"(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 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:GAURAV SHARMA Signing Date:03.05.2023 17:47:20 pending arbitral proceedings between the Petitioner and the Respondent before the Hon'ble Sole Arbitrator Shri K. K. Lahoti Justice (Retd.)..."
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that Unique Identification Authority of India (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. It is submitted that the petitioner as well as the respondent has acted as per guidelines of UIDAI.
3. The works of the petitioner and the respondent was observed and supervised by the UIDAI and 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. Therefore, evidence of the above said witness is necessary for just and proper adjudication of the matter pending before the learned Arbitral Tribunal. It is further submitted that on 20th August, 2012, the petitioner-Bank issued request for Proposal No. OBCIHO/DIT/RFP- UID/07/2012-13 (RFP) to enable eligible bidders to submit their proposal for collecting data for UID/Aadhar Project.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner 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. It is submitted that 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. UIDAI levied huge penalty upon the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:GAURAV SHARMA Signing Date:03.05.2023 17:47:20 respondent on account of delay in uploading, demographic errors and biometric errors. It is further submitted that a legal notice dated 27th January, 2018 was sent by the respondent calling the petitioner to appoint an arbitrator as per the Clause 8.2 of the Standard Terms of Contract.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that on 13th August, 2018, the respondent moved a petition before this Court under Section 11 of the Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes that have arisen between the parties in relation to the letter dated 24th November, 2012, whereby the petitioner had empanelled the respondent as Enrolment Agency for UID Project.
6. It is submitted that this Court vide its order dated 29th January, 2019, deleted UIDAI (respondent No. 1 therein), stating that there was no privity to the contract, from the array of parties and referred the matter to the Sole Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes between the parties. It is further submitted that the petitioner-Bank filed Special Leave Petition (C) No. 6267/2020 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against said order dated 29th January, 2019, the UIDAI is the principal contractor and necessary party of the matter. The Hon'ble Supreme Court stayed the operation of order dated 29th January, 2019 passed by the this Court vide its order dated 6th March, 2020.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that during the pendency of the above mentioned Special Leave Petition (SLP), the petitioner-Bank closed its evidence on 5th February, 2020. It is submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the SLP filed by the petitioner- Bank vide order dated 15th March, 2022. It is further submitted that the petitioner-Bank preferred an application before the learned Arbitral Tribunal Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:GAURAV SHARMA Signing Date:03.05.2023 17:47:20 seeking permission to move an application before this Court under section 27 of the Act, 1996, for assistance in recording of evidence of Mr. Arun Singh Rawat, Deputy Director (E&U), UIDAI or any other person concerned on 3rd November, 2022. The applications filed by the petitioner have been allowed by the learned Arbitral Tribunal vide order dated 5th April, 2023.
8. Heard.
9. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by Mr. Anukul Raj, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent. He prayed for some time to file reply.
10. Let reply/objection be filed within a week.
11. List on 18th May, 2023.
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J MAY 1, 2023 Dy/db Click here to check corrigendum, if any Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:GAURAV SHARMA Signing Date:03.05.2023 17:47:20