Dismissed

M/S V.K. Patel Translines v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 Mar 2020WRIC/8863/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenging the blocking of tank trucks and show cause notice was dismissed by the High Court for Chief Justice's Court, ruling that an arbitration mechanism existed, making judicial intervention unjustified.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; no interference ordered as arbitration mechanism is available.

M/S V.K. Patel Translines Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation… — Arbitration | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Chief Justice's Court

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8863 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- M/S V.K. Patel Translines Respondent :- Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd Atif,Anurag Khanna (Senior Adv.) Counsel for Respondent :- Vikas Budhwar

¶4

Hon'ble Govind Mathur,Chief Justice Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶5

This petition for writ is preferred to have following reliefs:

¶6

" a. Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 23.1.2020 (Annexure No. 12) passed by the Chief Manager Logistics (LPG), North (Respondent no. 3 herein) blocking tank trucks of Petitioner from utilization for transportation of Bulk LPG by road for the State of Uttar Pradesh & Odisha.

¶7

b. Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned show cause notice dated 7.1.2020 (Annexure No.9) passed by the Chief Manager Logistics (LPG), NR & ER (Respondent no. 3 herein) requiring the Petitioner for verification of UAM Number/MSE Certificate.

¶8

c. Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No. 3 to permit Petitioner for utilization of Tank Trucks for transportation of Bulk LPG by road for the State of Uttar Pradesh & Odisha in terms of Letter of Intent dated 8.10.2018 & 15.10.2018 issued by Respondent No. 2. "

¶9

On going through the agreement executed between the parties it reveals that under Clause 9 of that a complete mechanism is given to resolve the disputes by way of arbitration. We do not find any just reason to entertain this petition for writ when the remedy is available to the petitioner to get the disputes resolved by having arbitration as per provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It would also be appropriate to state that for having interim relief, the petitioner may avail remedy under

¶10

Section 9 of the Act of 1996. In view of it, we do not find any just reason to interfere in the matter. Writ petition is dismissed.

¶11

Order Date :- 17.3.2020 VMA

¶12

(Ajit Kumar, J.) (Govind Mathur, C.J.)

M/S V.K. Patel Translines v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S V.K. Patel Translines v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

M/S Shan Brick Field Mandar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Munni Lal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Abhishek @ Rajan and 2 Others Vs Bulandshahr Development Authority and 4 Others