Delhi HC: Retirement Document Valid Despite Alleged Signature Misuse

Quick Summary: A legal fight over a partnership business in Delhi ended with the court supporting a retirement document, dismissing claims that the document was tampered with.

The Case Begins: Partnership and Plot Issues

The story starts with a partnership business in Delhi involving several partners, including Shri Brajendra Khandelwal and M/S Rajendra Iron Mart. The business had applied for an industrial plot in Okhla, which was initially given but later taken back by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA). After a legal struggle, the plot was given back on July 20, 2011.

Dispute Over Retirement Document

Brajendra Khandelwal claimed that he was unfairly removed from the business through a fake retirement document dated January 19, 2010. He argued that his signatures on blank papers were misused to create this document.

Arbitration and Initial Verdict

The issue went to arbitration, where the arbitrator, Shri D.S. Pawaria, ruled in favor of Khandelwal on January 30, 2019. The arbitrator declared the retirement document and a later partnership change as invalid, awarding costs to Khandelwal.

Court Challenge: The Respondents Fight Back

Respondents M/S Rajendra Iron Mart and others challenged the arbitration decision under a section of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. They argued that the arbitrator ignored important evidence, including the signed retirement document and related papers.

High Court Decision: Upholding the Retirement Document

On December 22, 2025, Judges Navin Chawla and Madhu Jain of the Delhi High Court overturned the arbitrator's decision. They noted:

"The main question was whether Khandelwal signed blank papers that were later changed. The arbitrator did not address this directly."

The court found no evidence of tampering and emphasized that Khandelwal had admitted to signing the retirement document.

Legal Takeaway

This case highlights the importance of clear evidence in arbitration disputes. The court stressed that without proof of tampering, the retirement document remains valid.

Summary of the Verdict

The appeal was dismissed, confirming the validity of the retirement document. This decision shows the court's reluctance to change arbitration decisions without strong evidence of wrongdoing.

Judges Involved: Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Madhu Jain

Dates to Remember: - Arbitration Award: January 30, 2019 - High Court Judgment: December 22, 2025