AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Despite appearing in the cause list, the records of G.A. No. 1 of 2020 and G.A. No. 2 of 2021 have not been sent to this court. However, since the
petitioner has also made an interim prayer in the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 itself, for stay of operation
of the impugned award, such prayer is taken up for consideration.
It is glaring that the arbitrator, namely, Mr. Prakash Kashinath Hushing, who passed an interim order in respect of the arbitration agreement, was not
the person who passed the purported final award. The final award was apparently passed by one Mr. Rohit Singh. It is patent that two different
persons could not have acted as arbitrator interchangeably, that too behind the back of the present petitioner.
That apart, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner alleges that no notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or
otherwise was ever served on the petitioner prior to passing of the impugned award.
What stares at the face is that the cost of the arbitration was fixed at Rs.2,000/- only, including the fees of the arbitrator, clerk and other expenses of
arbitration, which is demonstratively less than the arbitrator would have been otherwise entitled to under the 1996 Act. The circumstances on record
clearly indicate that the petitioner has made out a strong prima facie case of fraud and malpractice have been practised upon the petitioner.
In view of the urgency involved, since the award is being sought to be executed at the present juncture, there shall be stay of operation of the
impugned award dated January 6, 2020 passed in connection with loan agreement no. SL1062503 dated December 31, 2017 (SME) passed by one
Rohit Singh until further orders.
It is made clear that the said ad interim order is being passed, in terms of prayer (c) of the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996, bearing A.P. No. 262 of 2020. Let A.P. No. 262 of 2020 appear in the list before the appropriate Bench, along with G.A. No.
1 of 2020 and G.A. No. 2 of 2021, six weeks hence.
The petitioner shall serve notices, along with server copies, of this order on the respondents as well as the purported arbitrator who passed the
impugned award, namely Mr. Rohit Singh at his address as given in the impugned award, within a week from date and file affidavit of service on the
next date of hearing. Affidavits, if any, shall be exchanged between the parties in the meantime.
Urgent certified photostat copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all formalities.