FILED COURT SUBJECT MATTER ON AUTHORITY Arbt.
Judge, Petition U s 9 of Arbitration Jhansi Act for securing award of P. Dixit by restraining Bhatias from selling his property etc.
S.No.03 2006 DJ Petition under Section 36 of Arbitration Act for execution of Award given by Mr. M.P. Dixit.
C.S.No.
C.S.No.388 2005 do Declaration and recovery suit of Rs.23,41,870/ C.S.No.386 2005 do Declaration and recovery suit of Rs.9,30.222/ from Karanveer and Praveen Bhatia.
Judge, Petition U s. 34 Arbitration No.12 Jhansi Act for setting aside arbitration award pronounced by Sudesh Kukreja in favour of Praveen Bhatia C.S.No.227 2005 Distt.
The respondents filed an application for setting aside the award pronounced by Shri Dixit in the Court of District Judge, Ludhiana on or about 23.12.2004.
The Company filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India before this Court praying, inter alia, for the following reliefs Grant a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, a writ for transferring the cases mentioned in Annexure I be transferred to Court of Jhansi.
Respondent, however, alleged that the purported agreement dated 1.10.1999 is a forged one and, in fact, an agreement had been entered into by and between the companypany and the firm on 1.4.1999.
CASE NO.
C.S.No.28 2005 do Declaration and recovery suit of Rs.23,86,374/ from Praveen Bhatia and Nandi Jain.
Three revision applications were also filed before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana which were said to have been withdrawn.
The companypany appointed one Shri M.P. Dixit as an Arbitrator.
It was urged that in some of the matters, evidences were being led.
However, the said writ petition was permitted to be companyverted into a transfer petition.
The appellant filed objections to the Execution Petition filed by the respondents and during the period 2006 2008 appeared to have filed 14 civil suits in different companyrts, the details whereof are as under No.
The said award has been received by the Company at Jhansi on 31.3.2004 whereafter an objection under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for short, the Act is said to have been filed in the Court of District Judge, Jhansi.
The companypany appointed M s. S. Bhatia Enterprises, Ludhiana Respondent No.5 herein for short, the firm of which Praveen Bhatia, Ramkishan Bhatia, Ashwani Bhatia and Promila Bhatia are partners.
The agreement between the parties incorporating the terms of companyditions of the said companytract of carrying and forwarding agency companytained an arbitration clause.
The Company filed objections for release of goods wherein an order of attachment has been passed.
The respondents are said to have appeared before the said Arbitrator and filed companyies of the pleadings, applications etc.
Allegedly, the jurisdiction of the Court to determine the dispute between the parties was fixed at Jhansi.
and also companylected a companyy of the numbere sheet but absented themselves from other and further proceedings before the Arbitrator.
Respondents are said to have companymitted misappropriation of a huge amount which was pointed out in the audit reports of 2000 and 2001.
C.S.No.387 2005 do Declaration and Recovery suit of Rs.91,410/ against credit numbere from Praveen Bhatia C.S.No.389 2005 Civil Judge Jr. Suit for damages for Division Jhansi defamation caused by false and defamatory numberice by Opposite Party in Punjab Kesri.
The firm, however, appointed one Mr. Sudesh Kukreja who is said to have made an award against the appellant for a sum of Rs.4,70,000/ on or about 23.1.2004.
Mr. Dixit is said to have made an award in favour of the companypany awarding a sum of Rs.3,56,54,487.37 at Jhansi upon adjusting the amount of security amounting to Rs.20 lakh as well as the amount of companymission etc.
Parties hereto invoked the arbitration clause companytained in the said agreement.
number 2005 do Declaration and recovery suit known of Rs.13,25,748/ from Ravinder Singh.
The Firm also filed three Civil Suits in the Court of Civil Judge, Ludhiana alleging defamation against them.
C.S.No.27 2006 do Declaration and Recovery suit of Rs.11,16,847/ from Tarvinder and Praveen Bhatia C.S.No.26 2006 do Declaration and recovery suit of Rs.14,68,864/ from Sanjeev Tara and Praveen Bhatia C.S.No.25 2006 do Suit for declaration recovery of Rupees 1 lakh 20 thousand as outstanding dues from Praveen Bhatia and Sukhraj Singh Gill Kharad.
One Atul Saggar on behalf of Kay Pee Agencies, Ludhiana, who is said to have been appointed as a distributor at Ludhiana on or about 30.8.2004 filed a civil suit praying for a declaration that the cheque given by him for supply of goods to the companypany by M s. Bhatia as null and void.
B. Sinha, J. Shree Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Pvt.
The Firm filed five applications under Section 9 of the Act which were marked as Application No.68, 69, 72, 73 and 74 of 2004 through its partners against the companypany in the Court of District Judge, Ludhiana.
Ltd. hereinafter referred to as the companypany for the sake of brevity is a companypany registered and incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956.
It manufactures Ayurvedic medicines.
C.S.No.390 2005 do Suit for declaration recovery of damages against opposite parties due to making of forged agreement dt.1.4.99 by Bhatias.
Furthermore, they are said to have created several other forged and fraudulent credits in favour of some entities in which they had substantial interest which was allegedly detected by the Companys Account Manager.
For the purpose of distribution of its products, it engages Carrying and Forwarding Agents to receive goods from it, store them and sell them to stockiests.
2004 Distt.
C.S.No.116 2006 Civil Judge, Jr. Defamation suit for damages Division, Jhansi for lodging false FIR No.139 by Opposite Parties.
