AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
24 paragraphs · 221 wordsHeard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned
counsel appearing on caveat.
Admit. Issue notice.
Mr. Sandeep Shah appears for respondent No.1. Requirement
of service on respondent Nos. 2 & 3 is dispensed with.
Call for the record. Requisition be given ''dasti'' to learned
counsel for the appellant.
Heard on stay application.
Though the present appeal questions the passing of the
award by the competent authority, dismissal of the claim raised
before the arbitrator and dismissal of objections under Section 34
of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in the circumstances
of the case wherein several legal issues arise pertaining to the
validity of the award passed by the Competent Authority, dismissal
of the claim by the arbitrator and the rejection of the objections
under Section 34, it is directed that if the appellant deposits a sum
of Rs. 25,00,000/- with the Competent Authority i.e. SDO, Mount
Abu, the rest of the award dated 13.05.2013 (Annexure 13)
passed by the Competent Authority shall remain stayed during the
pendency of the appeal. The amount so deposited be disbursed to
respondent No. 1 on filing an undertaking that in case the present
appeal is allowed, the amount shall be paid back along with
interest @ 6% per annum.
The stay application stands disposed of.
