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
13 paragraphs · 271 wordsMadan B. Lokur, J
The appellant is aggrieved by an order dated 16th April, 2001 passed by the learned Additional District Judge in Suit No. 956-A/1998.
The learned Trial Court framed the following issues on 10th December, 1999:
"1. Whether the Award dated 02.06.1998 is liable to be set aside as alleged ? OPP 2.
Whether the petition is time barred ? OPD"
The appellant has filed objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("the Act" for short) for setting aside an Award dated 2nd June, 1998 passed by respondent No. 2.
Since the parties did not lead any evidence, the first issue was decided against the petitioner and in favour of the respondents while the second issue was decided against respondent No. 1 and in favour of the petitioner.
There is no requirement under the provisions of Section 34 of the Act for parties to lead evidence.
The record of the Arbitrator was before the learned Additional District Judge and what was required to be done was to go through the record and find out whether the objections were maintainable or not.
This was not done by the learned Additional District Judge. Under circumstances, the impugned order dated 16th April, 2001 is set aside. The learned Additional District Judge will decide the objections on the basis of the record of the learned Arbitrator.
The appeal is disposed of.
CM No. 335/2002 also stands disposed of.
The parties will appear before the learned District Judge on 8th March, 2004 who will assign the case to appropriate Court.