Remanded

Pune Cantonment Board v. Lalit Nirman Business Development Pvt.Ltd.

Bombay HC25 Jan 2008ARA/26/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court on Arbitration Appeal No.26 of 2007, by consent, quashed the impugned order dismissing a Civil Miscellaneous Application. The matter was remanded to the District Court for de novo consideration within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order quashed; Civil Miscellaneous Application restored and remanded for de novo consideration within six weeks.

Pune Cantonment Board Vs Lalit Nirman Business… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2008)

¶1

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

 ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.26 OF 2007

¶4

 Pune Cantonment Board .. Appellants.

¶5

 Versus

¶6

 Lalit Nirman Business Development
 Private Limited & Anr. .. Respondents.

¶7

 Mr.K.J. Presswala, Ms.K.R. Daviervala i/by Mulla &
 Mulla for the appellants.

¶8

 Mr.S.S. Kulkarni for the respondents.

¶9

CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR, J.

¶10

DATED : 25th January, 2008
 P.C. :

¶11

 1. The grievance of the appellant is that the
 learned District Judge by the impugned order dated
 29-6-2007 has dismissed Civil Miscellaneous
 Application NO.383 of 2006 without considering the
 grounds raised in the application and accordingly
 seeks an order for remand. Learned Counsel for the
 respondents has no objection.

¶12

 2. By consent of the parties, the impugned
 order passed by the learned District Judge is
 quashed and set aside and the Civil Miscellaneous
 Application No.383 of 2006 is restored to the file.
 The matter is remanded back for denovo consideration
 in accordance with law. The learned District Court

¶13

¶14

 is directed to dispose of the Civil Miscellaneous
 Application within a period of six weeks from the
 date of receipt of the copy of this order. Parties
 to appear before the learned District Court on 15th
 February, 2008. The learned District Court is
 directed to act on the authenticated copy of this
 order.

¶15

 3. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

¶16

 J.P. DEVADHAR, J.

Pune Cantonment Board v. Lalit Nirman Business Development Pvt.Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pune Cantonment Board v. Lalit Nirman Business Development Pvt.Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prashant Surve Vs Municipal Corpn. of Gr. Mumbai and 5 Ors.

Arun Deo and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Smt. Shakuntala B. Mande and Anr. Vs the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and Anr.

The Agricultural Produce Market Committee Vs Gopalkrushna Mandir Dindori Public Trust and Anr.

Shri P.G. Phadtare Vs Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation

Govindji Walji Kumbhar D/H- Devidas Govindji Kumbhar @ Jethva and Othrs Vs the State of Maharashtra