ORDER :

I.A. No. 776/2023 (Delay)

1. This is an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter “CPC”) for condonation of delay in filing the recall application.

2. For the reason stated in the application, the delay of 76 days in filing the recall application is condoned.

3. The application is disposed of.

I.A. No. 775/2023 (Recalling of order dated 26th September, 2022)

1. The instant application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking the following relief:

“(a) Recall order dated 26.09.2022 passed by the Hon'ble Court and the present petition be decided on merits again.....”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on 26.09.2022, the present case was listed and when the case was called out, the present counsel was arguing before another Bench and was thus, unable to appear before the Court and hence, this Court dismissed the petition vide its order dated 26.09.2022.

3. It is further submitted that vide order dated 09.01.2020 the arbitral record was summoned and this Order was communicated to the learned Arbitrator. However, the learned Arbitrator proceeded with the arbitral proceedings and instead of sending the arbitral record to the High Court, passed the arbitral award in utter disobedience of the orders of this Court.

4. It is further submitted that the aforesaid facts were not mentioned by the respondents and, that the counsel of the petitioner was arguing before another Bench of this Court and was thus unable to appear before the Court at the time when the order dated 26.09.2022 was passed by the Court.

5. Per Contra, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed the prayers made in the instant application and submitted that the proceedings in which the validity of the said order is being contested is not proper. The instant application accordingly merits to be dismissed.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record as well as the impugned order that is sought to be recalled.

7. The main petition had been filed under Section 14 read with Section 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking termination of the mandate of the Sole Arbitrator and appointment of substitute Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes that have arisen between the parties.

8. The said petition was dismissed by this Court vide its order dated 26.09.2022. The said order is extracted hereunder:

“1. None is present on behalf of the Petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the Respondent submits that he has been handed over the Letter dated 16.08.2022 from the Respondent wherein it is mentioned that the Award had already been announced on 24.07.2020 and pursuant to the Award, a No Claim Certificate was received from the firm and thereafter the FDR has already been received vide Letter dated 11.01.2021.

In view of the Letter submitted on behalf of the Respondent, nothing further survives in the present petition, which is hereby dismissed.”

9. A bare perusal of the Order makes it evident that the said Order has been passed on merits. Before delving into the matter, it is pertinent to peruse the law on recall of its order by a Court.

10. Section 151 of the CPC provides for Civil Courts to invoke their inherent jurisdiction and utilize the same to meet the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process. Although the provision is broadly worded, the said provision has been interpreted to limit its ambit to only those circumstances where certain procedural gaps exist, to ensure that substantive justice is not obliterated by hyper technicalities. As far as back in 1961, this Court in Padam Sen vs. State of U.P. AIR 1961 SC 218, observed as under:

“8.......The inherent powers of the Court are in addition to the powers specifically conferred on the Court by the Code. They are complementary to those powers and therefore it must be held that the Court is free to exercise them for the purposes ment