FAO No.754 of 2009 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.754 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 2.2.2010 Paramjit Singh and others .... Appellants. Versus M/s Chohan Finance Private Limited and another ..... Respondents. CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.Surinder Sharma, Advocate for the appellants. Mr.K.S.Dhillon, Advocate for respondent No.1. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN J. While resolving a dispute arising out of hire purchase agreement dated 30.11.1999, the Arbitrator, vide his award dated 24.8.2004, allowed a sum of Rs.7,28,713/- to the claimant/respondent payable by appellants No.1 to 3 with interest @ 12% per annum w.e.f. 1.7.2003 till the date of its realisation. The appellants challenged the award of the Arbitrator dated 24.8.2004 by way of Objection filed under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short `the Act') basically on the ground that an ex parte award has been passed without notice and amount already paid to the extent of Rs.1,17,000/- has not been deducted but only a credit of Rs.53,050/- has been granted by the Arbitrator. The learned District Judge, Jalandhar framed issues arising out of the Objections and after considering evidence, rejected both the FAO No.754 of 2009 (O&M) -2- contentions of the appellant vide his order dated 10.11.2007. In the present appeal, same arguments have been repeated which were taken before the learned District Judge, Jalandhar that an ex- parte award has been passed by the Arbitrator without notice and less amount has been credited in the account of the appellants than the amount which has been actually paid. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and have perused the record. In respect of first argument that an ex parte award has been passed by the Arbitrator without notice, it would be suffice to say that evidence available on record shows that the Arbitrator had served the appellants through registered AD & UPC and also by way of publication pursuant to which they had appeared and participated in the proceedings but they neither filed any reply to the Objection nor pursued it after sometime, therefore, there was no option left with the Arbitrator but to proceed against them ex parte. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the first submission made by the counsel for the appellant. Insofar as the second and last submission is concerned, it has been found by the Court below that hire purchase agreement was entered into on 30.11.1999, therefore, there was no question of any payment having been made prior to that date to be credited into the account of the appellant. It has been found that the amount of Rs.53,050/- paid on 6.7.2000 and 22.7.2000 deserves to be credited and the same was allowed. I do not find any error in this regard also. No other argument has been raised before me by the counsel for the appellants. FAO No.754 of 2009 (O&M) -3- In view of the above discussion and finding of fact based on documentary evidence on record, I do not find any error of law and facts in the impugned order. Hence, the present appeal is found to be without any merit and the same is hereby dismissed though without any order as to costs. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) 2.2.2010 JUDGE Meenu