EMR CHOWDARY vs ENGINEERING PROJECTS INDIA LIMITED

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 16.04.2026 Judgment pronounced on: 27.04.2026 + O.M.P. (COMM) 400/2017 EMR CHOWDARY .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Arjun Natarajan, Mr. Ayush Kumar & Mr. Nakul Gupta, Advocates. versus ENGINEERING PROJECTS INDIA LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr. Manish Paliwal, Ms. Megha Yadav, Ms. Srashti Sahu & Mrs. Trupti Das, Advocates. + O.M.P. (COMM) 408/2017 ENGINEERING PROJECT (INDIA) LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Manish Paliwal, Ms. Megha Yadav, Ms. Srashti Sahu & Mrs. Trupti Das, Advocates. versus ASSOCIATED CONSTRUCTION COMPANY .....Respondent Through: Mr. Arjun Natarajan, Mr. Ayush Kumar & Mr. Nakul Gupta, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR JUDGMENT Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEERU O.M.P. (COMM) 400/2017 & connected matter Signing Date:29.04.2026 Page 1 of 37 10:39:10 1. The present Petitions, being OMP (COMM) 400/2017 and OMP (COMM) 408/2017, have been filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 19961, challenging various findings and aspects of the common Arbitral Award dated 05.04.2017, as subsequently modified by the additional/modified award dated 19.08.2017. Since both petitions arise out of the same arbitral proceedings and involve interconnected as well as overlapping issues, they are being decided together by way of this common judgment. 2. At the outset, it is noted that both the present Petitions are in the nature of cross-objections under Section 34 of the A&C Act. It is also an undisputed position that Associated Construction Company is the sole proprietorship concern of EMR Chowdary. Accordingly, for the sake of clarity and consistency throughout this judgment, the expressions “Associated Construction Company” and “EMR