2025 (1) TMI 413

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ral order passed by learned Sole Arbitrator on 6th December, 2023, the respondent was supposed to file its Statement of Defence on or before 14th February, 2024, which it did not. 3. However in the interest of justice, it was granted one more opportunity. 4. Thereafter, as per the second procedural order dated 3rd May, 2024, it was permitted to file Statement of Defence on or before 21st May, 2024 but since even by that day, no Statement of Defence was filed, its right to file the same was closed on 24th May, 2024. 5. An application was moved by the petitioner herein before the learned Sole Arbitrator seeking recall of the above said order and while considering the above said application, the learned Arbitrator framed the following....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ch of this Court has enumerated certain circumstances wherein such type of petition can be entertained. Though, in that case, the challenge was in context of dismissal of application filed under Section 16 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act but the observations are equally important in the present context. Relevant portion of aforesaid judgment reads as under: - "24. While there is no doubt that a remedy under Articles 226 and 227 are available against the orders passed by the Arbitral Tribunal, such challenges are not to be entertained in each and every case and the court has to be "extremely circumspect". 25. Recently, in Surender Kumar Singhal v. Arun Kumar Bhalotia [Surender Kumar Singhal v. Arun Kumar Bhalotia, 2021 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (v) Interference is permissible only if the order is completely perverse i.e. that the perversity must stare in the face. (vi) High Courts ought to discourage litigation which necessarily interfere with the arbitral process. (vii) Excessive judicial interference in the arbitral process is not encouraged. (viii) It is prudent not to exercise jurisdiction under Articles 226/227. (ix) The power should be exercised in 'exceptional rarity' or if there is 'bad faith' which is shown. (x) Efficiency of the arbitral process ought not to be allowed to diminish and hence interdicting the arbitral process should be completely avoided." 26. A perusal of the above would show that it is only ....