DEEWAN SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Union of India through its Chief Engineer, Bareilly Zone
Click here to view full judgement.
B.S. Verma, J. -
(1.) LEARNED counsel for the parties have submitted that since the facts are not disputed in the writ petition, therefore, the writ petition may be decided finally at the admission stage.
(2.) IN the present writ petition the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 3 -8 -2012 passed by Addl. District Judge Almora in Arbitration Misc. Appeal No. 14 of 2009 filed U/S. 37(1b) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 and the judgment and order dated 12 -6 -2009, passed by Civil Judge Almora in Misc. Case No. 8 of 1999. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that a reference was made to the Sole Arbitrator by the Engineer in Chief, Army Headquarter New Delhi vide letter No. 13600/CC/717/E8 dated 4 -3 -1998 in terms of condition No. 70 of IAFW 2249 forming part of the contract between the parties. Thereafter the Arbitrator having heard both the parties gave an award on 7 -12 -1998. The Arbitrator had rejected the claim of the petitioner. The petitioner filed objections U/S. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') before the Civil Judge (S.D.), Almora. The objections were dismissed by the Civil Judge (S.D.) vide order dated 12 -6 -2009. Aggrieved further the petitioner preferred appeal before the District Judge, Almora U/S. 37(1)(b) of the Act. The appeal too was dismissed by the Addl. District Judge and Sessions Judge, Almora vide impugned judgment and order dated 3 -8 -2012. Hence this writ petition.
(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.