M/S G-Eng Advisory Services Private Ltd. Thru. Autho. Representative Kumari Priyanka and 2 Others v. National Highways Authority of India Thru. Its Competent Authority Chairman and 6 Others

Allahabad HC18 Nov 2024WRIC/9759/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition regarding an impugned order. The court noted the dispute involved a contract with an arbitration clause. It directed parties to submit affidavits regarding the service of 13 letters and the existence of the arbitration clause before considering interim relief against the order dated 24.10.2024.

What the court decided

AI extract

M/S G-Eng Advisory Services Private Ltd. Thru. Autho… — Arbitration | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 2

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9759 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- M/S G-Eng Advisory Services Private Ltd. Thru. Autho. Representative Kumari Priyanka And 2 Others Respondent :- National Highways Authority Of India Thru. Its Competent Authority Chairman And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Singh,Anshuman Singh,Geetika Yadav,Nishchay Anand Counsel for Respondent :- Samidha,Sarvesh Kumar Dubey

¶4

Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶5

1. On the last date, we have passed the following order:-

¶6

"1. Heard Sri Prashant Chandra, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Anshuman Singh and Ms. Geetika Yadav for the petitioners and Sri Sanjay Bhasin, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 1 to 4.

¶7

2. Let a copy of the contract entered into between the parties be brought on record and it would be indicated to us as to whether there is an arbitration clause therein.

¶8

3. Counsel for the opposite parties shall seek instruction as to whether any of the documents/letters referred in the impugned order dated 24.10.2024, which are 13 in number, were provided to the petitioners, if not, what is the impact of it on the subject matter of this writ petition. This of course is without prejudice to the existence of the remedy by invoking the arbitration clause, if there is any such clause.

¶9

4. List on 5.12.2024 as fresh. "

¶10

2. Heard Sri Prashant Chandra, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Anshuman Singh and Ms. Geetika Yadav for the petitioners and Sri Sanjay Bhasin, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 1 to 4.

¶11

3. On the last date the contention of the petitioner's counsel was that there was 13 letters referred in the impugned order dated 24.10.2024, which has not been provided to the petitioner.

¶12

4. We had also asked for the copy of the contract entered into

¶13

between the parties to brought on record and also to be informed as to whether there is an arbitration clause. Copy of the contract has been placed before us but not on affidavit. It is accepted by the petitioner's counsel that there is an arbitration clause at 8.4 preceding that there is clause 8.1 regarding amicable settlement.

¶14

5. Let the contract be brought on record along with an affidavit of the petitioner.

¶15

6. As regards 13 letters referred hereinabove, Sri Bhasin, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the opposite parties says that all of these letters were provided to the petitioner and most of them are already on record and that the petitioner has responded to all the said letters, however, he has not been able to file an affidavit to this effect. Let him do so.

¶16

7. At this stage, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner says that application for interim relief be disposed of. We are afraid we cannot do it unless we have the entire facts before us, even for the purposes of interim relief, especially in response to the query made by us in our earlier order and are satisfied that the arbitration clause contained in the contract, which has not been brought on record does not come in the way in entertaining this writ petition and passing requisite orders, we, therefore, grant time to the opposite party for filing an affidavit as aforesaid and also to the petitioner for bringing on record the contract aforesaid.

¶17

8. List on 13.12.2024 as fresh.

¶18

9. On the next date, we will consider the interim relief application.

¶19

[Brij Raj Singh, J.] [Rajan Roy, J.]

¶20

Order Date :- 5.12.2024 Anuj Singh

¶21

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

M/S G-Eng Advisory Services Private Ltd. Thru. Autho. Representative Kumari Priyanka and 2 Others v. National Highways Authority of India Thru. Its Competent Authority Chairman and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

M/S G-Eng Advisory Services Private Ltd. Thru. Autho. Representative Kumari Priyanka and 2 Others v. National Highways Authority of India Thru. Its Competent Authority Chairman and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M/S Rathi Steel and Power Ltd. Furnace Div. Thru Director Vs State of U.P. through Prin.Secy. Energy and Ors.

M/S Rathi Steel and Power Ltd.Ghaziabad Thru Director and Anr. Vs U.P.Power Transmission Corporation Ltd.Lko.Thru DIRECTORandORS

M/S Rathi Steel and Power Ltd.Furnace Div.Thru. Its Director Vs Directorate of Electrical Safety U.P. Thru. Director and Ors.

Hazratpur Kisan Seva Samiti Thru. Auth. Rep. Paramjit Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Transport Deptt. Lko and 2 Others

Deepak Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 11 Others

State Bank of India Thru. Its Chief Manager Amit Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others