Rakesh Kumar vs Cideas Investment India Pvt. Ltd. on 11 December, 2015

2. This is an appeal against order dated 05.10.2015, passed by the
trial court in an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996, filed by the petitioner.
2.1 By virtue of the said application, the appellant challenged the
award dated 09.12.2000, which was, evidently, corrected by the
learned arbitrator on 06.01.2001. This award was passed exparte, as
according to the arbitrator, despite notice, there was no appearance.
2.2 Before the trial court, the appellant had challenged the award,
(as noted in paragraph 7 of the impugned judgment) on the ground,
that no notice of appointment of the arbitrator was received, and that,

FAO 425/2015 Page 1 of 6
the vehicle lease agreement dated 10.10.1995 (in short the lease
agreement) was not signed by him in his capacity as a guarantor.
2.3 It was thus stated in support of this objection that the appellant
had signed the lease agreement only in his capacity as the Managing
Director of the lessee company i.e. M/s. Akshay Lease Investo India
Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to ALIPL).

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply

*