The arbitrator dismissed the petition as withdrawn by the petitioner, who cited an order under Section 17 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 in a companion petition. The court allowed the withdrawal and dismissed the petition accordingly.
The petition was dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
arbp804-15.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.804 OF 2015
JHS Svendgaard Laboratories Ltd. ...Petitioner
V/s.
Gillette India Ltd. And Anr. ...Respondents
Mr. P. Ranjan, i/b. Halai & Co., for the Petitioner.
CORAM : S.C. GUPTE, J.
12 JANUARY, 2016
P.C. :
. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks to withdraw this petition on the ground that the petition has become infructuous by reason of an order passed in a companion petition (Arbitration Petition No.1015 of 2013) under Section 17 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. Learned Counsel submits that his client has applied for review of that order and that he would like his contentions in that behalf to be kept open. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn accordingly.
( S.C.GUPTE, J. )
sg` Pg 1 of 1
1 provisions across 1 enactments
JHS Svendgaard Laboratories Ltd.
Gillette India Ltd.
S.C. GUPTE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
