Indraprastha Power Generation Co. Ltd. v. EM Services (I) Pvt. Ltd.
Court – Delhi High Court
“41. Once there is counter claim of the petitioner in its pleading and the petitioner has spelt out the reasons as well as has given basis for arriving at a figure of counter-claim and moreover, the respondent in its rejoinder has denied the claim of the petitioner, it was incumbent upon the learned Sole Arbitrator to frame an issue in this regard. The order dated 13.02.2009 is erroneous to the extent as the learned Sole Arbitrator in the said hearing ought to have framed an issue with regard to the counter claim of the petitioner. Every disputed fact/claim made by a party and rebutted by the opposing party is an issue in itself which need to be framed for adjudication.
50. For the foregoing reasons, the Arbitral Award dated 18.06.2010 is in conflict with the fundamental policy of Indian Law. In addition, the said Award suffers from violation of most basic notions of justice despite specific pleading, no issue of counter claim was framed by the learned Sole Arbitrator. Since there was no issue, the petitioner did not lead any evidence. Hence, the petitioner was clearly deprived of the adjudication of its claim and the same shocks the conscience of the Court. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the Arbitral Award dated 18.06.2010 is set aside.”
— Team AMLEGALS
Please reach out to us at rohit.lalwani@amlegals.com in case of any query.