In a PIL under CM(M) 4023/2024, the Delhi High Court disposed of a petition where the petitioner impugned an arbitrator's direction to file affidavit examinations-in-chief. The court held the apprehension of adverse inference was misplaced as the petitioner remained at liberty not to press for witness examination.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~70
FIITJEE LTD .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Mukesh M. Goel and Ms. Disha Sharma, Advocates.
versus
DR PRITHIVIRAJ SWAMY .....Respondent Through:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA
O R D E R
% 12.12.2024 CM APPL. 73002/2024 (preponement of date of hearing)
Bearing in mind the short issue that is involved in the petition, the same is taken up for disposal today.
Application stands disposed of.
CM(M) 4023/2024
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 03:20:44
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
DECEMBER 12, 2024 / vp
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 03:20:44
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a misplaced apprehension of adverse inference justifies challenging an arbitrator's direction to file affidavit examinations-in-chief prior to claimant evidence completion.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to refrain from pressing for examination of witnesses whose affidavits have already been taken on record.
FIITJEE LTD
DR PRITHIVIRAJ SWAMY
Ravinder Dudeja
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 227 of the Constitution invoking the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate civil courts.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
