Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Pradeep Kumar N. Dwivedi - Appellant
Versus
Ketan Dwivedi - Respondent
O.M.P. (E) (COMM.) 9 of 2022 & I.A. 5818 of 2022
Decided On : 13-04-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedure for summoning witnesses under arbitration. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court permits witness summons as requested. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral)--Petitioner seeks assistance of the Court in taking evidence in terms of Section 27 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by orders dated 06.02.2021 and 07.08.2021, petitioner has been permitted by the Arbitral Tribunal to approach this Court under Section 27 of the Act.
3. In view of the above, this petition is allowed. The three witnesses mentioned in paragraph 13 of the petition be summoned to appear before the Arbitral Tribunal with the summoned record at the venue i.e. Neeti Bagh Club on 22.04.2022 at 3 PM.
4. Order as well as summons be given dasti to the petitioner for service on the said witnesses.
5. Petition is allowed in the above terms.
The court upheld the authority of the Arbitral Tribunal to permit a party's request for assistance in summoning witnesses under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
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.
The Court emphasized that the role under Section 27 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is not adjudicatory, but only to grant formal approval of the Arbitrator's order.
Court's intervention in arbitration proceedings is limited to cases of glaring error; otherwise, Arbitral Tribunal's decisions on witness summons will be upheld.
Arbitration proceedings allow for issuance of summons to witnesses to facilitate evidence presentation, ensuring fair adjudication.
The Court clarified that only the Arbitral Tribunal can initiate representation under Section 27(5) of the Arbitration Act, and the petitioner's conduct undermined the arbitration process, leading to....
The arbitrator has the discretion to determine procedural matters, including the necessity for oral evidence, and courts should only interfere in exceptional circumstances.
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
