JUDGMENT :

1. This petition is filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) seeking to impugn the award dated 30.06.2014 passed by the learned arbitral tribunal constituted by the Delhi Hindustani Mercantile Association, Arbitration Panel-1, Chandni Chowk, Delhi.

2. Some of the relevant facts, which are apparent from the claim petition filed by the respondent, are that the petitioner concern was purchasing fabrics as per his specifications from the respondent. The respondent raised bills in the name of the Concern M/s Mahima Exports proprietorship of Petitioner No. 1 as required by the petitioner. The respondent also opened an account in the name of the petitioner Concern M/s Mahima Exports during the course of the business in his books of accounts maintained by him during the ordinary course of business. It is stated that as per regular books of account maintained by the respondent, a balance of Rs.15,52,964/- is still payable from petitioner No.1. It is also claimed that in terms of the invoice and as per business practice, interest @ 24% per annum is payable for delayed payment. A sum of Rs. 11,18,124/- is claimed on account of interest. Petitioner No.3 is said to have issued a cheque on 26.03.2010 for Rs.1,00,000/- for the dues which was returned unpaid. A criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is said to have been filed. A legal notice was issued on 13.12.2012 and the arbitration clause was invoked.

3. It is the case of the respondent that in the invoice raised there exists an arbitration clause. The said clause 6 reads as follows:

Clause 6 of the Invoice:

"We are member of Delhi Mercantile Association in case of any dispute its decision is final and binding for both the parties."

4. I may note that there appear to be two sets of different invoices used by the respondent. Another set of invoice has another alleged arbitration clause, namely, clause 7 which reads as follows:-

“Clause 7 of the Invoice:

All disputes regarding this invoice will be settled by Delhi Hindustani Mercantile Association and will be binding on both parties.”

5. Based on this clause, the respondent sought to initiate arbitration proceedings between the parties and requested the Delhi Mercantile Association to take appropriate steps. The Delhi Mercantile Association nominated the arbitral tribunal, namely, three member arbitral tribunal. The arbitral tribunal has now passed the impugned award.

6. The petitioner appeared before the learned arbitral tribunal and filed his written statement. Three issues were framed by the learned arbitral tribunal which are as follows:

“1. Whether there is arbitration agreement between plaintiff and Defendants?

2. Whether Plaintiff is entitled to recover his claimed amount along with interest from the Defendants, if yes, at which rate of interest?

3. Relief.”

7. The award notes that the respondent has produced various challan and bills. The challan and bills bear the signatures of the petitioner. It also notes that the respondent filed a computer sheet of his account from the year 2008-2009 to 2012-2013 as evidence, the respondent has shown unpaid a balance of Rs.15,52,964/-. As the petitioners were not appearing regularly before the learned arbitral tribunal, the defence of the petitioners was struck off on 15.02.2014. The arbitral tribunal also notes that the petitioners have filed court proceedings (presumably orders of court) where they have stated that they are not appearing before the learned arbitral tribunal whereas they have actually been appearing before the learned arbitral tribunal (i.e. have made a wrong statement). The learned arbitral tribunal, therefore, concludes that the petitioners are misleading and passing time. The arbitral tribunal assumed the claim of the respondents to be true. Accordingly, an award was passed in favour of the respondents for Rs.15,52,964/- along with interest of Rs.11,18,124/- from (i.e. upto) 01.0