Court No. - 3
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No.
- 1773 of 2017 Appellant :- Chief Secretary P.W.D. And 4 Othrs. Respondent :- M/S Shanti Construction And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rudra Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.
There is a delay of 46 days in filing of the appeal, which we condone in view of the explanation furnished in the delay condonation application.
Delay Condontion Application No. 424398 of 2017 is allowed.
Office to allot regular number to the appeal.
We have heard learned Standing Counsel for the appellants and Sri Vinay Kumar Khare, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1.
The appeal has been preferred under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act against the order of the District Judge dated 29.7.2017, whereby the application of the appellants filed under Section 34 of the Act for setting aside the arbitral award dated 3.5.2013 has been rejected.
On the matter being referred to the sole arbitrator, a reasoned and speaking award was passed on 3.5.2013. The appellants applied for setting aside the said award apparently on the ground that the award is in conflict with the policy of India and that it has been obtained by fraud. However, the appellants could not establish how the award is in conflict with the policy of India and the nature of the fraud, which has been played in procuring the said award.
We have pointedly asking the learned Standing Counsel to explain the reason on which the award is said to be in violation of the policy of India and is said to be obtained by fraud, but nothing material in this regard could be placed before us, in fact, he is unable to point out any such defect in the award.
In such circumstances, the District Judge has not at all erred in law in refusing the setting aside the arbitral award.
The appeal has no merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.5.2018 Noman