SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Del) 415

SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, MARKANDEY KATJU
U. C. Aggarwal – Appellant
Versus
Container Corpn. – Respondent


Advocates:
A. N. Tiwari, for Appellant.
A. N. Tiwari, for Appellant.

Judgement

MARKANDEYA KATJU, C.J. :- This writ appeal has been filed against the impugned judgement of the ADJ dated 23-8-2005. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

2. The facts have been set out in the judgement of the learned single Judge and hence we are not repeating the same.

3. It has been stated in para 12 of the impugned order that there was no arbitration agreement between the parties and hence the matter cannot be referred to the arbitrator. It was also stated that the claim was time barred.

4. We asked learned counsel for the petitioner to tell us whether the petitioner has produced any arbitration agreement he stated that he has not. He contended that the respondent should be directed to produce the arbitration agreement. The respondent denied that there is any arbitration agreement. A party cannot be compelled to prove the negative. When the respondent is denying that there was any arbitration agreement how can we direct him to produce it?

5. The burden to prove is on the petitioner and if he says that there is an arbitration agreement, it is for him to prove that. It is well settled that when neither the plaintiff nor the defendant lead evidence,



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top