Petition filed without annexing award under challenge, vakalatnama invalid: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that a petition filed before it without annexing the award under challenge and without vakalatnama or statement of truth cannot be considered a valid one. .Justice Vibhu Bakhru, therefore, dismissed a petition which was unsigned and lacked supporting documents."It is also material to note that the petition as filed on September 13, 2019 was not accompanied by the impugned award or the vakalatnama. The decision of the coordinate bench of this Court in Union of India v. Bharat Biotech International Limited (supra) is squarely applicable in the facts of this case and, therefore, the filing as on September 13, 2019 cannot be considered as a valid filing," the Court said in its order. .The Court was dealing with a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Reconciliation Act, 1996.The Court was told that the petitioner received a copy of the award on June 12 and filed a petition before the High Court on September 13 - a day after the end of limitation period under Section 34(3) of the Act.However, the Court noted that the petition filed on September 13 had only 73 pages and was without statement of truth, the award under challenge, vakalatnama and other documents.The registry of the Court had also pointed out that the petition was unsigned and had no pagination. In total, the registry pointed out 16 defects in the plea.The petition was then refiled on October 24, 2019. This time it had over 1,300 pages but was still marked defective by the registry. It was returned at least three times by the registry pointing out several defects before being finally accepted on November 19, 2019..Noting the fact while the first filing ran only into 73 pages which was subsequently increased to over 1,300, the court said that it was apparent that the entire framework of the petition was changed.The judge said that the petition filed on October 24 cannot be considered the same as the one filed initially and, therefore, only the final plea will be considered valid.However, since the petition filed on October 24 was beyond the period for which delay could be condoned by the court, the plea was rejected on the ground of limitation. .Advocate Debarshi Bhadra appeared for the petition. Advocates MK Ghosh, Tina Garg and Amit Mohanty appeared for the respondent. .[Read Judgement]