C.R.No.2075 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.2075 of 2008. Decided on August 28, 2009. Shri S.K.Bansal .. Petitioner VERSUS Shri Jagdish Parshad and another .. Respondents * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI PRESENT Mr.Aman Kashyap, Advocate, for the petitioner. M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) A perusal of order dated 11.12.2007, passed in execution proceeding under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act'), for enforcement of Award dated 19.06.2002, indicates that though the issues had been framed but the crucial disputed question in issue, whether there had been any arbitration agreement or any arbitration award recognized by law existed, has not been decided. The order does not show that any arbitration agreement or arbitration award stood established. Once the executing Court had opted to frame issues, it was incumbent to pass speaking order in context to the material available on record. A specific plea has been raised by the petitioner . . . 1 C.R.No.2075 of 2008 objecting to the enforcement of the award saying that the decree holder in collusion with other contractors has played a fraud upon the petitioner and the Court by alleging that their existed an arbitration agreement, whereas no such agreement had ever been executed and no arbitration proceedings had ever taken place. As the said issue goes to the root of the matter, the order dated 11.12.2007, is hereby set aside and the case is remanded back to the Additional District Judge, Chandigarh, to re-ascertain issue Nos.1 to 3, which had been framed by permitting the parties to lead evidence. The parties are directed to appear before the executing Court on the date fixed. If deemed necessary, opportunity will be given to the parties to lead evidence to establish the fraud alleged, by giving corresponding right to the other party to rebut the evidence produced in that context. Disposed of. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE August 28, 2009. rka . . . 2