2009 (7) TMI 782 - HC - Companies Law

Summary

The High Court of Delhi, in the case of 2009 (7) TMI 782, heard an appeal challenging a judgment from 2003. The judgment in question was made by a Single Judge who refused to review a previous order from 1999, which had made an award by a Sole Arbitrator a rule of the court. The appellant argued that the award was unjustified as compound interest was not claimed by the respondent. However, the court found that the award had been made a rule of the court without any challenge by either party and with the consent of the parties. The court dismissed the appeal, stating that it would be unfair and unjust to allow the appellant to raise this plea at that stage. The pending application was also disposed of accordingly. Mukul Mudgal and Neeraj Kishan Kaul, JJ. presided over the judgment. Sanjeev Anand, Ms. Kajal Chandra, and D. Nishant represented the Petitioner, while Neeraj Malhotra represented the Respondent. The court's decision was based on the fact that the award had already attained the status of a decree and could not be modified or set aside unless it suffered from a lack of inherent jurisdiction. The court found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it.