Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

36. It is submitted that the petitioners have not disputed the hypothecation of those vehicles but disputed the hire-purchase transaction. The loan agreement was a self contained agreement showing the finance amount, installment amount and interest payable. The Schedule relied upon by the respondent was a fraudulent document. Even in the R.C. books in respect of those vehicles, the names of the petitioners were shown as registered owners of those vehicles. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel that though the petitioners had amended the written statement and had alleged the forgery and fabrication on the part of the respondent in various documents and though the learned arbitrator had granted liberty to the respondent to seek amendment to the statement of claim if it so desired in view of the amendment to the written statement carried out by the petitioners, the respondent did not controvert the allegation of forgery and fabrication made by the petitioners and thus ppn 16 arbp-630.09(j).doc those averments made by the petitioners were deemed to have been accepted.

52. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Poulose Vs. State of Kerala & Anr., reported in (1975) 2 SCC 236 in support of his submission that the learned arbitrator could not have ignored the material document such as criminal proceedings in which the petitioners had alleged the forgery and fabrication of document by the respondent which were similar in the present proceedings.