UNION OF INDIA versus ORIENT ENGG. & COMMERCIAL CO. LTD. & ANR.

UNION OF INDIA versus ORIENT ENGG. & COMMERCIAL CO. LTD. & ANR.

The Supreme Court held that arbitrators or quasi-judicial authorities should not be routinely summoned as witnesses. The Court's process should be used sparingly, and only if specific relevant grounds are affirmatively made out, such as a prima facie case of mala fides and not merely for general purposes. The lower courts failed to apply this standard. The routine summoning in this case was incorrect, and the appeal was allowed.

Parties
Appellant: Union of India; Respondent No. 1: Orient Engineering & Commercial Co. Ltd.; Respondent No. 2: Another Respondent
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 October 1977
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order Dated 25 1 77 of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in T. No. 2253 of 1976 in Suit No. 459 a of 1974
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Witness Summoning, Arbitration, Powers of Court, Order XVI C.p.c., Section 121 Evidence Act
Civil Procedure Witness Summoning Arbitration Powers of Court Order XVI C.p.c. Section 121 Evidence Act

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Union of India

Appellant

Orient Engineering & Commercial Co. Ltd.

Respondent No. 1

Another Respondent

Respondent No. 2

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order Dated 25 1 77 of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in T. No. 2253 of 1976 in Suit No. 459 a of 1974

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an arbitrator or quasi-judicial authority can be summoned as a witness under Order XVI CPC, considering Section 121 of the Evidence Act; what is the duty of the Court before issuing such summons

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that arbitrators or quasi-judicial authorities should not be routinely summoned as witnesses. The Court's process should be used sparingly, and only if specific relevant grounds are affirmatively made out, such as a prima facie case of mala fides and not merely for general purposes. The lower courts failed to apply this standard. The routine summoning in this case was incorrect, and the appeal was allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of the High Court set aside; no order as to costs; the matter left open for the High Court to issue process on a fresh application with proper grounds for summoning the arbitrator.