Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. Petitioner had filed the present petition under Section 34 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (herein after referred as The Act), seeking setting aside of the arbitral award dated 21/08/2019 passed in case no. DAC/1521/01-17 titled Tarsem Singh vs Ultimate International Pvt. Ltd. by Sh. D.P Kaushik, Ld. Sole Arbitrator. Ld. Sole Arbitrator awarded Rs.6,57,159/- with interest @12% per annum until of date of action and Rs.20,000/- in lieu of return of tools and equipments of claimant and cost of Rs.50,000/- in favour of claimant/respondent payable by petitioner.

2. I have heard Sh. Nagendra Kumar with Sh. Kailash Chandra, Ld. Counsel for petitioner; S.N. Khanna, Ld. Counsel for respondent and perused the record of the case, the arbitral proceedings record, relied upon precedents, filed brief written arguments on behalf of petitioner as well as on behalf of respondent and given my thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions put forth.

3. Adumbrated in brief the relevant facts as set up by petitioner through Ld. Counsel are as follows:-

6. Section 34 (1) (2), (2A) and (3) of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read as under:-

"34. Application for setting aside arbitral award- (1) Recourse to a court against an arbitral award may be made only by an application for setting aside such award in accordance with sub-section (2) and sub- section (3).

(2) An arbitral award may be set aside by the court only if-

23. Impugned arbitral award reads as follows:-

"Arbitration Award DAC/1521/01-17 In the matter of:

Tarsem Singh versus Ultimate Internation Pvt. Ltd.

Issues were framed in this case in the ages-old standard manner of framing of issues despite efforts of the tribunal to carry out a proceeding of the nature of first hearing in conformity with Rule 1(5) of the CPC. (mutatis mutandis). The claimant filed his affidavit of evidence. The Respondents' ld. counsels carried out cross-examination.