{"id":295556,"date":"2022-12-18T09:00:00","date_gmt":"2022-12-18T03:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/?p=295556"},"modified":"2022-12-18T19:58:05","modified_gmt":"2022-12-18T14:28:05","slug":"delhi-court-hdfc-rs-25000-cost-appointment-sole-arbitrator-finance-deal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/constitutional-law-news\/courts-news\/delhi-court-hdfc-rs-25000-cost-appointment-sole-arbitrator-finance-deal\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi court dismisses HDFC Bank plea against appointment of sole arbitrator in finance deal with Rs 25,000 cost"},"content":{"rendered":"\n


A local court in the national capital has disposed of a petition filed by the HDFC Bank Limited seeking enforcement of an Ex-parte Arbitral Award passed by a sole arbitrator, who was unilaterally appointed by the DH Finance Company on August 27, 2021, in its favour.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

District Judge Surinder S. Rathi at Commercial Court in Shahdara district, Karkarduma on November 23, further imposed a cost of Rs 25,000 on Execution Petitioner HDFC, giving it time till four weeks to deposit the amount with the Shahdara Bar Association (SBA). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The court observed that the amount would be used for conducting orientation courses to improve advocacy skills and strengthen the justice system at the grassroot level.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The District Judge focussed on 14 key questions on law, while delivering his verdict. First, it held that generally, the Execution Court cannot go behind the Decree. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, if the Executing Court found that the judgment was non est or that the Decree\/Award was a nullity on the grounds of lack of inherent jurisdiction with the Arbitral Tribunal, Section 47 of the Code fully empowered the Execution Court to declare the Decree\/Award as ‘Not Executable’ but not a ‘Nullity’. 
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Citing several landmark cases and statutory provisions of the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court, the District Judge ruled that unilaterally appointing a sole arbitrator was ‘non est’ and void ab initio. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It said the awards passed by such a Tribunal were ‘Non-Executable’. The court held that the actions of such an execution petitioner was held to be a ‘gross abuse of legal process’ in an attempt to reap benefits from his own wrong with impunity and utter disregard for the Courts. 
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The District Judge noted that such occurrences hampered the ease of doing business in India and manipulated the hapless respondents. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It further held that the agreements must be in consonance with Section 12(5) read with Schedule 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (amended in 2015), adapting to recent practices as suggested in the BN Srikrishna Report.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A local court in the national capital has disposed of a petition filed by the HDFC Bank Limited seeking enforcement of an Ex-parte Arbitral Award passed by a sole arbitrator, who was unilaterally appointed by the DH Finance Company on August 27, 2021, in its favour<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":135105,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false}}},"categories":[246],"tags":[2836,122620,122622,118343,99460],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/d2r2ijn7njrktv.cloudfront.net\/IL\/uploads\/2021\/01\/09144313\/Allahabad-High-Court-on-Anticipatory-bail.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/295556"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=295556"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/295556\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/135105"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=295556"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=295556"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=295556"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}