Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1933 UK
Judgement Date : 1 July, 2022
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
01.07.2022 ARBAP No. 67 of 2018
Sri Vipin Sanghi, C.J.
Mr. Aditya Singh, the learned counsel for the
applicant.
Mr. Xitij Kaushik, the learned counsel for the
respondent no. 1.
The applicant is seeking the appointment of a
sole arbitrator in terms of the arbitration agreement
contained in the Agreement dated 17.06.2001, in
Clause 5 thereof.
The respondents have filed their counter
affidavit, and it is stated in paragraph no. 8 thereof
that the present Application has been filed on the basis
of forged and fabricated documents.
The respondents state that the original
agreement dated 15.12.1990 was registered on
14.01.1991, and its extension agreement dated
15.10.1991 was registered on 19.10.1991, and that
these agreements expired long back. Thereafter, on
the basis of forged and fabricated documents, the
applicant is allegedly trying to grab the property of the
respondents. The respondents also seek a direction to
the applicant to produce the original documents so that their genuineness can be examined.
In the light of the judgment of the Supreme
Court in Velugubanti Hari Babu v. Parvathini
Narasimha Rao and Another, (2016) 14 SCC 126,
before the parties could be referred to arbitration, it is
essential for me to be satisfied whether the Arbitration
Agreement is a forged and fabricated document.
Accordingly, I direct the applicant to place on
record the original documents, on the basis of which
the present Application is premised. The same be filed
in a sealed cover within a week.
List this case on 08.07.2022.
(Vipin Sanghi, C.J.) 01.07.2022 Rahul
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!