Back
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH
Fun Choice – Appellant
Versus
Terrestrial Foods Private Limited – Respondent
ORDER
Chandra Dhari Singh, J. (Oral)
I.A. 3513/2023 (For recalling and setting aside of order dated 28th July, 2020)
1. The instant application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 1 seeking the following reliefs:
"A. Recall and set aside the order dated 28.07.2020 passed by this Hon'ble Court, and dismiss the Section 9 petition; and
B. Pass an Order directing that all the consequential proceedings (including but not limited to the entire Arbitration proceedings) be declared non-est, null and void and having no binding value; and
C. Impose exemplary costs on the Petitioners for playing a fraud on this Hon'ble Court or take any other action against the Petitioners as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper; and
D. Pass any other order or further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant/respondent no. 1 submitted that the order dated 28th July, 2020 passed by this Court, whereby this Court was pleased to appoint Mr. N.P. Kaushik, Retd ADJ as sole arbitrator for adjudication of the disputes and differences between th
The court has the power to recall and set aside its own order if obtained by fraud, but such applications should not be an abuse of process of law and should not intend to delay or derail the proceed....
A writ petition under Article 226 is not maintainable to challenge a judicial order appointing an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator violates legal principles under Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, rendering the award non-est.
Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not provide for the substitution or termination of the mandate of an arbitrator, and cannot be invoked to substitute an arbitrator appoin....
Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator in conflict with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is non-est in law.
Unilateral appointment of the arbitrator in conflict with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 leads to the setting aside of the award.
A party that frustrates arbitration forfeits its right to appoint an arbitrator, and written commitments to arbitration must be honored unless revoked.
Courts hold inherent power to recall judgments if obtained through fraud or concealed material facts; non-parties cannot challenge compromise decrees under CPC provisions.
A party can seek arbitration anew after an arbitral award is set aside, and a notice under Section 21 is not necessary unless the arbitration clause is freshly invoked.
A stranger to a compromise decree cannot challenge it under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC; inherent powers exist to recall orders obtained by fraud.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
