PATNA HIGH COURT ISSUES JUDGEMENT ON OM PRAKASH SAHA V/S AMBIKA PRASAD SAHA

PATNA, India, June 18 -- Patna High Court issued the following judgment on June 17:

I have already heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the sole respondent.

2. This miscellaneous appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the order dated 30.11.2013 passed in Misc. Application No. 53 of 2009 whereby and whereunder learned Additional District Judge-I has set aside the award dated 08-10-2007 & 15-10-2007.

3. The appellant, Om Prakash Saha is own brother of the respondent Ambika Prasad Saha. The respondent Ambika Prasad Saha challenged the award dated 15.10.2007 whereby the properties of two brothers were partitioned. According to the respondent, the appellant had got his signature on a blank paper and behind his back, in collusion with the arbitrators, he got a concocted and fabricated arbitral award without arbitration agreement therein. The respondent challenged that award before the District Judge, Bhagalpur and after admitting it, the learned District Judge, Bhagalpur transferred the case to the Court of Additional District Judge-Ist, Naugachia, and by the impugned order dated 30.11.2013, the Additional District Judge, Ist, Naugachhia allowed the application of the respondent and set aside the arbitral award.

4. The case of the respondent is that he was not aware of the award. On 13.05.2009, one Arunjay Kr. Singh an Advocate Clerk at Naugachia informed him that an Execution Case No. 01 of 2008 is pending against him in the Court of Learned Munsif, Naugachia. On 14.05.2009, the respondent inspected the record of that case and came to know that the execution case has been fixed for ex-parte hearing on that day. Prior to that, he had no knowledge about that case. The Execution Case No. 01 of 2008 was filed by the appellant without giving knowledge to the respondent, on the basis of forged and fabricated arbitration award and he wanted to procure the order of the Execution Court clandestinely. The respondent applied for certified copies of the award filed by the appellant in the Execution Case but the certified copy thereof was not provided to the respondent. The respondent had also filed an application under Order IX rule VII read with Section 151 of the CPC, to recall the order whereby the case was proceeded for exparte hearing, which is pending before the Execution Court. Further case is that the appellant, Om Prakash Saha is his own brother and he was in-charge of joint family and during jointness, he procured a blank paper, signed by the respondent, which remained in his custody. He misused that paper and got forged, fabricated and collusive arbitration award in collusion with his friends; Ratan Kedia, Arun Kumar Sah, Md. Ikram Soni, Munna Bhagat and Arun Kumar Yadav. The respondent made a prayer to set aside the arbitral award on other grounds inter alia that no arbitration agreement was existing between the respondent and the appellant.

The rest of the document can be viewed at https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/MiMxMzEjMjAxNCMxI04=-KKiRz--am1--VjHFI=

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.