\il l" $-30 X IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + o.M.P.4IB/20I0 UGGARSAIN RICE & cENERAL MILLS & ORS ..... petitioners Through Ms. Amisha Upadhyay, Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Mr.Anish Maggo and Mr. Saurav K. Mehra, Advocates VCTSUS INDIAN COUNCIL OF ARBITRATTON & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi and Mr Somesh Kr. Dubey, Advocates for D-2 FCI Ms. Natasha Sahrawat, Adv. for ICA $-3e + O,M.P. 372/2OIO SHAH RICE MILLS & ORS .... Petitioner Through Ms. Amisha Upadhyay, Mr. pawan Upadhyay, Mr. Anish Maggo and Mr. Saurav K. Mehra, Advocates VCTSUS INDIAN couNClL oF ARB|TRAT|ON & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi and Mr Somesh Kr. Dubey, Advocates for D-2 FCI Ms. Natasha Sahrawat, Adv. for ICA $-40 + O.M.P.494/2OIO M/S PARSHOTAM LAL & CO ..... petitioner Through Ms. Amisha Upadhyay, Mr. pawan Upadhyay, Mr.Anish Maggo and Mr. Saurav K. Mehra, Advocates VCTSUS INDIAN COUNCIL OF ARBITRATION & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Sukumar pattjoshi and Mr Somesh Kr. Dubey, Advocates for D-2 FCI Ms. Natasha Sahrawat, Adv. for ICA $-41 + O.M.P. 6L9/2OLO DASHMESH RICE MILLS ..... petitioner Through Ms. Amisha Upadhyay, Mr. pawan Upadhyay, Mr. Anish Maggo and Mr. Saurav K. Mehra, Advocates Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified PIt\t\ VETSUS INDIAN COUNCIL OF ARBITRATION & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi and Mr Somesh Kr. Dubey, Advocates for D-2 FCI Ms. Natasha Sahrawat, Adv. for ICA AND 5-42 + o.M.P.47L/20L0 GURUDASHMESH RICE MILLS & ORS ..... Petitioners Through Ms. Amisha Upadhyay, Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Mr. Anish Maggo and Mr. Saurav K. Mehra, Advocates VCTSUS . INDIAN COUNCIL OF ARBITRATION & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi and Mr Somesh Kr. Dubey, Advocates for D-2 FCI Ms. Natasha Sahrawat, Adv. for ICA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTTCE G.S.S|STANI ORDER 30. r.r..201L 1. Counsel for the parties submit that all the matters may be disposed of by a common order. 2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are engaged in the business of rice milling. Petitioners .seek termination of the arbitration initiated against them which has lapsed during the course of time and thus does not survive. lt is further submitted that the constitution of the arbitral tribunal is also against the terms of the agreement. Counsel for the petitioners further submits that in the arbitration proceedings which are pending, Arbitrator(s) has/ have failed to follow the %o o.M.P. 41_8/20L0, 372n"O, 494/1.0, 61"9/L0 & 471_/L0 3. principles of natural justice and fair opportunity of completion of pleadings, admission/denial of documents and leading evidence is not being followed which is resulting in great prejudice to the rights of the petitioners. In fact, in some cases, the award has been reserved without completion of pleadings. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners would be satisfied in case a direction is issued to the Arbitrator(s) to follow principles of natural justice and Arbitrators(s) be also directed to grant reasonable opportunity to the petitioners to file reply, admission/denial of documents be allowed, and thereafter, parties should be allowed to lead evidence by way of affidavits and the deponents be allowed to be cross-examined. The respondents have no objection to this suggestion, without admitting that the Arbitrator(s) is/ are not acting in a fair and just manner or that they are not following the principles of natural justice. In these circumstances, all these petitions are disposed of with the following agreed directions:- (i) The petitioners shall file reply to the statement of claims within 30 days' time from today, in the cases wheie either reply has not been filed or where no permission was granted to file reply. The respondents will be given 30 days' time to file replication. The parties will be allowed to file documents within the same period. The parties will 4. O.M.P. 41"8/20L0, 372/L0, 494/L0, 6L9/L0 61 47lfi.O \, (iii) complete admission/denial of documents. Thereafter, the parties will be given opportunity to file affidavit by way of their evidence and the deponents will be allowed to be cross-examined. Thereafter, upon hearing, the learned Arbitrator will pronounce the award. This procedure will be following even in those cases where the award has been reserved, without granting the respondents (petitioners herein) fair opportunity of defending the matter(s) In case the petitioners feel that they have not been given sufficient opportunity to defend the matter(s), they will make an application before the Arbitrator. The Arbitrator will consider the application and grant them reasonable opportunity in terms of the above agreed terms. In view of above directions, all the petitions [O.M.P. Nos. 4IB12OIO,372lIO, 494110,619/10 E( 4711101, stand disposed of. Order dasti. (ii) 5. 6. lA.Nos.937L, L4O43/20L0 & lA,Nos.4O37, L6374/2OLL in OMP.No.4L8l2O1O lA.No.85L2l2OLO in OMP.No.372l2Ot O lA.No. I-t O3O/2OLO in OMP.No.494l2OLO lA.No.1-399I-/2OLO in OMP.No.5L9/2OLO 7. In view of order passed in the petitions [O.M.P. 372lIO, 4941!0, 619/10 & 471i101, applications of. Nos. 418120l-0, stand disposed NOVEMBER 'raj' 30, 2OL1 J_ e-s'32"{a^t-" --- G.s.srsrAN l, I