RAJENDER SHARMA Vs. M/S TANMAY DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision is filed for setting aside the order dated 31.10.2018 vide which an application seeking permission to file rejoinder moved on behalf of the petitioner (respondent herein) was allowed as well as the order dated 02.04.2019 and 16.05.2019 passed by the Additional District Judge-cum-Presiding Judge, Special Commercial Court at Gurugram, vide which the parties were directed to furnish proper affidavit in support of the pleadings.

(2.) An Award dated 12.12.2017 came to be passed for an amount of Rs. 35.13 crores, to be paid by the respondent. The respondent filed objections to the Award by way of an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act , 1996 (for short, 'the 1996 Act') on the ground that the Award has been passed in excess and constitutes improper exercise of jurisdiction on the part of the learned sole Arbitrator. The claimant-petitioner filed their reply dated 04.07.2018 to the above application praying for dismissal of the said application. The claimant- petitioner also filed their cross-objections under Order 41 Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short,'CPC'). An application for dismissal of the cross-objections was also filed. The respondent, accordingly, moved an application for granting permission to file rejoinder to the reply filed by the petitioner. Learned Additional District Judge-cum-Presiding Judge, Special Commercial Court, Gurugram allowed the application for filing the rejoinder and vide order dated 02.04.2019 and again on 16.05.2019 directed the parties to furnish proper affidavits in support of the pleadings.

(3.) While praying for setting aside the orders dated 31.10.2018, 02.04.2019 and 16.05.2019, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted as under: