1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CR No. 17 of 2022 Date of Decision : 14.05.2026 H.D.F.C Bank Ltd. ...Petitioner Versus Pati Devi & Ors. ...Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma. Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents :Respondent No.1 is stated to have expired. Mr. Ravneet Kumar, Advocate, vice Yashpal, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Respondent No.3 is ex-parte vide order dated 01.05.2025 Romesh Verma, Judge(oral) CMP No. 1984 of 2025 The present application has been filed by the applicants for bringing on record the legal representatives of deceased respondent No.1, who is stated to have expired on 06.10.2019. 2. Learned counsel for the non-applicants have no objection in case the present application is allowed. 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. In view of the averments as made in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit and in view of the submissions as made by learned counsel for the applicants, the legal representatives of deceased respondent No.1, as mentioned in para-4 of the application are ordered to be brought on record subject to all just exceptions after condoning the delay and setting aside the abatement, if any. Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Civil Revision No.17 of 2022 The present petition has been preferred against the impugned judgment as passed by the learned District Judge, Mandi dated 15.9.2021, whereby an execution petition filed by the present petitioner has been dismissed on the ground that the appointment of the arbitrator was not as per law and hence, the award pronounced by the arbitrator is non est. 2. The issue of an arbitral award passed by unilaterally appointed arbitrator cannot be considered as an award under the provisions of the Act and consequently, the same has to be regarded as non est in the eyes of law came up for consideration before this Court in Civil Revision No. 94 of 2021 titled as HDB Financial Services Limited vs. Jiwa Nand 3 and others decided on 5.9.2025, wherein award so passed was held to be non est in the eyes of law. 3. For reasons alike, the impugned order dated 15.9.2021 is upheld. This Court sees no reason to interfere with the well reasoned judgment passed by the learned District Judge, Mandi, H.P., therefore, the revision stands dismissed. Pending miscellaneous applications, ifany, also stand disposed of. (Romesh Verma), Judge 14.05.2026 (veena)