An appeal under the Arbitration Act was disposed of without discussion on merits because an arbitration award was declared after the impugned injunction order came into force.
The appeal was 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
APPEAL UNDER ARBITRATION ACT NO. 1 OF 2013
M/S. TRIMURTI EXPORTS THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED REP. (PARTNERS) AND 3 ORS. ... Appellants Versus M/S. MODELAMA EXPORTS LTD. REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SH. GAGAN GULATI ... Respondent
Shri Nitin Sardessai, Advocate for the Appellants. Shri Rajat Wadhwa and Shri Hanumant D. Naik, Advocate for the Respondent.
Coram:R. M. SAVANT, J. Date:7th October, 2013
P.C.:
The order impugned is one dated 16/01/2013 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Panaji by which order the injunction in respect of three additional properties which are mentioned in the operative part of the order came to be granted. It appears that after the impugned order was passed the award itself has been declared by the learned Arbitrator i.e. Justice Anil Dev Singh (Retd.) in April, 2013. In view of the said supervening event, it is not necessary to go into the merits of the above Appeal and it would be open for the
2
appellants whilst challenging the Award, to urge the contentions which are sought to be urged in the above Appeal.
R. M. SAVANT, J.
NH
M/s. Trimurti Exports Through Its Authorized Rep. (Partners) and 3 Ors.
M/s. Modelama Exports Ltd. Rep. By Its Director Sh. Gagan Gulati
R. M. Savant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
