Arbitration – Execution of Award – In the absence of any objections, the Court suo moto could not hold that the arbitrator had acted beyond the terms of the reference.

Mr. Kuldip Singh, J.:- Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 6.9.2006 passed by the learned District Judge, Gurgaon, whereby the learned District Judge has suo moto and in the absence of any objection petition, refused to execute the arbitration award dated 19.3.2005.

2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent no.2 Arbitrator in Arbitration proceedings between the present petitioner Precision Electronic Components Private Limited and respondent no.1 Rajesh Sharma, passed the following award on 19.3.2005:-

(i) As per evidence on record, on allotment, the respondent Shri Rajesh Sharma became the owner of 1,85,000 equity shares of the said company and in consideration of the allotment of the said shares, he executed the document titled as ‘Relinquishment Deed’. It is admitted between the parties that the said ‘Relinquishment Deed’ read as a whole conveys unequivocal intention of the respondent to transfer his Plot no.7, Electronic City, Sector -18, Gurgaon to the Company. The Company paid the full consideration of the said plot to the respondent, who was the owner of the said plot, in the form of 1,85,000 equity shares of Rs.10/- each and the company acquired full rights/ titles/ interest/ possession of the said plot in pursuance of the document dated 24.10.1998 titled as ‘Relinquishment Deed’. Ever since the execution of the document on 24.10.1998, the said possession of the company and the respondent has never done any act in relation to the plot and contrary to it, the company raised construction on the said plot and indicated it as its assets in the annual balance sheet filed with the Registrar of Companies and other necessary quarters (Annual Balance Sheets of the Company as on 31.03.2001 and as on 31.03.2004 have been placed on record by the claimant). I, therefore, hold that the respondent had relinquished all his rights/ title/ possession/ interest in Plot No.7, Electronic City, Sector-18, Gurgaon, in favour of the claimant company, Precision Electronic Components Private Limited (formerly PEC International Pvt. Ltd.) and after the execution of the ‘Relinquishment Deed’ dated 24.10.1998 in favour of the company, the claimant-company has not only been an equitable owner but has been absolute owner of the plot for all intents and purposes since 24.10.1998. I further hold that the respondent Shri Rajesh Sharma neither has any interest or title either in the said plot no.7, Electronic City, Sector -18, Gurgaon, nor has any claim on the equity shares of M/s Precision Electronic Components Private Limited (formerly PEC International Pvt. Ltd.), having sold the shares in pursuance of the “Agreement to Sell”.

(ii) Since the respondent has himself admitted the fact of his relinquishment and legal rights in the said plot after having received full consideration amount of Rs.18,50,000/- in the form of 1,85,000 equity shares of Rs.10/- each of M/s Precision Electronic Components Pvt Ltd. (formerly PEC International Pvt. Ltd.), but the technical and legal requirement for registration of the Transfer Deed under Transfer of Property Act remains to be completed, the respondent is directed to complete all legal and technical requirements including registration of transfer/ Sale Deed for transferring the above-said plot No.7, Electronic City, Sector-18, Gurgaon, in favour of the claimant-company. However, expenses of all such legal and technical requirements including Stamp Duty for registration of Transfer Deed would be borne by the claimant-Company as per established practice.

3. It is to be noted here that in the said proceedings before the Arbitrator, the petitioner has filed the statement of claim. Respondent filed reply and thereafter, the petitioner-claimant led his evidence and respondent also examined him as a witness and got his statement recorded. After hearing both the parties, said award was passed on 19.3.2005. Thereaf