Citation : 2009 Latest Caselaw 2644 Del
Judgement Date : 15 July, 2009
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Reserve: 24.4.2009
Date of Order: 15th July, 2009
OMP No. 317/2001
% 15.7.2009
BHEL ... Petitioner
Through: Mr. J.C.Seth, Advocate
Versus
Delkon India ... Respondent
Through: Nemo
JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not?
3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?
ORDER
This petition has been preferred against the award dated 6th July,
2001 whereby the learned Sole Arbitrator Mr. C.N.Gard allowed the claim of the
contractor (respondent herein) and awarded different amounts under different
claims in favour of the contractor and rejected all the contentions and counter-
claims of the petitioner. The arbitration proceedings in this case and in case of
V.D.Swami & Company v. BHEL were proceeding before the same Arbitrator
together. An application was made by the petitioner before the Arbitrator
requesting him to recuse himself in this case and V.D.Swami's case on the
ground of bias and prejudice.
2. After considering the entire record, this Court has come to the
conclusion in OMP No. 215/2001 (BHEL v. V.D.Swami & Company) that the
Arbitrator was highly biased and was determined to pass an award against the
petitioner in both the cases. The Arbitrator in this case as well in the other case
overlooked the entire evidence placed on record by the petitioner. This award
is also liable to set aside on the ground of bias and is hereby set aside. The
judgment rendered in OMP No. 215/2001 be read as part of this case.
July 15, 2009 SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, J. vn
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!