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



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Vibhu Bakhru, J.
PSA Nitrogen Limited - Appellant
Versus
Company Secretary Gail (India) Ltd. - Respondent
O.M.P. (E) (COMM.) 4 of 2022
Decided On : 16-03-2022




An application under Section 27 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act requires prior approval from the Arbitral Tribunal, and challenging an order without such approval is not permissible.

Headnote:(A) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 27 - Application for assistance in taking evidence - Petition filed by claimant praying to set aside the order closing evidence without the approval of the Arbitral Tribunal - The petition was dismissed as it sought to challenge the Arbitral Tribunal's procedural order, which the claimant was not authorized to do under Section 27. (Paras 1, 5, 6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner requested to set aside the order closing its evidence and to summon a witness; however, the petition was made without the approval of the Arbitral Tribunal, and the evidence had been closed due to non-compliance with the procedural requirements.

Findings of Court:
The petitioner lacked the necessary approval from the Arbitral Tribunal to file the application under Section 27, rendering the petition misconceived.

Issues: The main issues addressed were whether the petitioner could challenge the order of the Arbitral Tribunal and whether the application under Section 27 was valid without necessary approval.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that an application under Section 27 can only be pursued with the Arbitral Tribunal's approval; without such approval, the petition is not maintainable.

Result: The petition is dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's request for evidence and the procedural history. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court's explanation of statutory provisions. (Para 3 , 5)
3. application of section 27 of the a&c act. (Para 4)
4. petition dismissed due to lack of tribunal approval. (Para 6)
5. final order and dismissal of application. (Para 7)

JUDGMENT

Vibhu Bakhru, J.(Oral)

O.M.P. (E) (COMM.) 4/2022

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 27 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, inter alia, praying as under:

    "a) Pass an Order/Directions to set aside the Order Dated 25th February 2022 and allow the Petitioner to conduct its evidence.

    b) Pass necessary order/directions for summoning and taking evidence of Mr. Kotak subramanium as an Witness and/or any other official in place of him."

2. It is seen that by the procedural order dated 25.02.2022 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal, the evidence of the petitioner (Claimant before the Arbitral Tribunal) was closed. The said order records the statement made on behalf of the respondent that it did not wish to examine any witness. Therefore, the respondent's evidence was closed as well. Prior to 25.02.2022, the matter was taken up by the Arbitral Tribunal on 12.01.2022. At the said hearing, the evidence of petitioner's witness (CW-1) was recorded and he was discharged. The Arbitral Tribunal had noted that no affidavit of any other witness had been filed on behalf of the petitioner (claimant), despite several opportunities. However, at that stage, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had stated that the petitioner required to examine one further witness who is an officer of the respondent. However, no witness was present on behalf of the petitioner on 25.02.2022.

3. The Arbitral Tribunal had listed the matter for final hearing on 21.03.2022.

4. Section 27 (1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 enables an application to be made to the Court for assistance in taking evidence. However, the said application is required to be made either by the Arbitral Tribunal or any party, with the approval of the Arbitral Tribunal.

5. Section 27 (1) of the A&C Act, is set out below:

    "27. Court assistance in taking evidence.-

    (1) The arbitral tribunal, or a party with the approval of the arbitral tribunal, may apply to the Court for assistance in taking evidence."

6. In the present case, concededly, the petitioner does not have any approval of the Arbitral Tribunal to make this application. On the contrary, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 25.02.2022 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal. This is clearly beyond the scope of Section 27 of the A&C Act.

7. The present petition is misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed. The pending application is also disposed of.

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 Back to top