Mr. Kuldip Singh J.: - The appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 21.01.2015 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Chandigarh, whereby the objection petition filed by appellant under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short ‘the Arbitration Act’) against the ex parte Award dated 12.04.2012 passed by Shri R.N. Yadav, Sole Arbitrator, was dismissed.

2. The case of the appellant before the learned Addl. District Judge, Chandigarh was that they had entered into an agreement of sale dated 30.12.2009 with eSys Information Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh (in short ‘eSys’), whereas respondent induced the petitioner to invest in eSys. No agreement was entered between the petitioner and respondent No.1. The agreement dated 01.09.2010 produced by respondent No.1, was forged and fabricated. The petitioner challenged the said agreement by filing of a civil suit titled as “L.S. Industries vs Xerox India Ltd. & anr.” in the Civil Court at Chandigarh on 21.12.2011, wherein the validity of the agreement dated 01.09.2010 was challenged.

3. The Civil Court vide order dated 13.02.2012 sought the report of Cental Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL), Chandigarh regarding the genuineness of the signatures of Birender Kumar, an employee of the appellant-company, who is stated to have signed on behalf of the appellant. On the direction of the Court, the Arbitrator was informed on 05.01.2012. The appellant-Company requested the Arbitrator not to proceed the arbitration proceedings since the civil suit is pending. However, the Arbitrator passed the Award on 12.04.2012 without waiting for the result of the civil proceedings. It is stated that the said Award is illegal and arbitrary. Learned Addl. District Judge, Chandigarh dismissed the said objections.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also carefully gone through the case file.

5. A perusal of the file shows that as per the respondent- Company, the appellant had entered into an agreement dated 01.09.2010 for promotion and sale of the product of the respondent-company. Certain claims were made by the respondent-company before the Arbitrator. It is stated that the present appellant received goods to the value of Rs.4,52,19,423/- (rueees four crore fifty two lac nineteen thousand four hundred twenty three only). Rs.1, 02,81,429/- (rupees one crore two lac eighty one thousand four twenty nine only) are also recoverable as interest as on 03.09.2011 with further interest @ 1.5% per month in terms of the agreement. The amount has not been paid by the present appellant. On 17.10.2011, the respondent- Company issued a termination-cum-demand notice calling upon the present appellant to pay the total outstanding amount. The notice was replied but the amount was not paid. Therefore, Clause 33 of the Agreement was invoked by the respondent-company and the present appellant was ordered to appoint the Arbitrator. As per the arbitration Award, the notice dated 08.12.2011 of the arbitration proceedings was issued for preliminary hearing on 06.01.2012 and later on registered notice was issued on 15.12.2011 but the appellant did not appear and was proceeded against ex parte. Accordingly, the ex parte Award was passed.

6. The facts and circumstances as coming out from the appeal file as well as arbitration file, are that there is an agreement on 01.09.2010 between the parties, which was stated to be signed by Birender Kumar, an employee of the present appellant. The appellant denied the signatures of the said employee. It is also not disputed that said Birender Kumar had left the service and now he is not traceable. It also comes out that the respondent-Company issued a notice on 17.10.2011 for calling upon the present appellant to make the payment. The appellant sent the reply to the said notice on 20.10.2011 and the rejoinder to the reply was sent by the respondent-Company on 15.11.2011. Vide letter dated 28.11.2011 (Annexure P-3). The respo