The High Court held that the petitioner should have availed the remedy under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed.
Petitioner directed to avail remedy under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; Writ Petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20181 of 2020
Petitioner :- M/S Kc India Test Laboratories Llp Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Madan Lal Rai Counsel for Respondent :- Mahboob Ahmad
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
Sri Narendra Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent is present.
For the issue being raised in the present writ petition, it would be appropriate that the petitioner may avail the remedy under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 9.12.2020 sfa/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition is maintainable or the remedy under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is available.
M/S Kc India Test Laboratories Llp
State Of U.P.
2 Others
Sunita Agarwal
Jayant Banerji
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
