Disposed
C. L. Naidu Litter Flower v. Edu Smart Services Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Delhi HCARB.P./113/2016
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
$-35
I
C. L. NAIDU LITTER FLOWER Petitioner Through Mr.Y.Rajagopala Rao, Adv. with Mr.Hitendra Nath Rath, Adv.
versus
EDU SMART SERVICES PVT LTD & ANR Respondents Through None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH
ORDER
% 19.02.2016
I cannothear this matter. List the same before anotherBench on 25^ February, 2016, subject to orders of Hon'ble the Judge Incharge (Original Side).
J FEBRUARY19,2016/ka
}G%J.
$-2
Petitioner Through: Mr. Y. Raja Gopal Rao, Adv. with Mr. Manoj K. Jain. Adv.
versus
EDU SMART SERVICES PVT LTD & ANR.
'Respondent
^
Through:
CORAM:
^
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO ORDER
% 25.02.2016
lA 2402/2016
Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
ARB.?. 113/2016 & lA 2401/2016
./i T
This is a petition filed underSection 11 and 12(3) of the Arbitration& Conciliation Act, 1996. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitionerthat the appointmentof an Arbitratormade by the respondentsis not in terms of clause 9.1 of the Agreement between the parties. He has drawn my attention to page 7 of the documents. According to him, the acceptable Sole Arbitrator was necessarily to be appointed by the
respondents,which in this case, the respondentshave failed to do, inasmuch as the respondents without notice to the petitioner had appointed an
Arbitrator. He also reliesupon the orderdatedNovember3, 2015 passedby
this Court in Arbitration Petition No.441/2015 in similar circumstances.
Issue notice to the respondents returnable before the Court on 1^^ April, 2016,
V. KAMESW^ RAO, J
FEBRUARY 25,2016/ak
$-5 to 9
MINERVA PUBLIC SCHOOL Petitioner
Through:Mr.Y.RajagopalaRao, Adv.
versus
EDU SMART SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.
Respondents
Through: Mr.AshutoshKumar, Adv.
(9) ARB.P. 113/2016,lA 2401/2016
C. L. NAIDU LITTER FLOWER Petitioner Through: Mr.Y.RajagopalaRao, Adv.
versus
EDU SMART SERVICES PVT LTD & ANR Respondents Through: Mr. Ashutosh Kumar, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
ORDER
% 01.04.2016
Mr. Ashutosh Kumar, learned eounsel appears for the respondents and seeks and allowed three weeks to file reply. Rejoinder within two weeks, thereafter.
Renotify on July 14, 2016.
Learned counsel for the respondents states that the respondents shall requestthe learnedArbitrator,to defer the date of hearingin the
arbitration proceedings to a date beyond July 14, 2016. The statement
is taken on reeord.
0^
V. KAMESWAR BIAO, J
APRIL 01, 2016
RN
V
$-5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SAVITRI DEVI MEMORIAL INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL THROUGH: ITS PRESIDENT Petitioner Through: Mr. Sudesh Goyal, Advocate.
versus
EDU SMART SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED
TH ITS AUTHORISEDREPRESENTATIVE& ANR... Respondents Through: Mr. R. Narayanan, Advocate for R2.
CORAM:
A
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
ORDER
% 03.11.2015
ARB.?. 441/2015 & I.A. No.16084/2015
compliance of the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Ordinance,2015 dated 23'"^ October,2015.
J.R. MIDHA, J.
NOVEMBER 03,2015
ak
"(ii'liljlih-''
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to hear the petition regarding the appointment of an arbitrator?
Whether to allow an exemption for the pending application?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Arbitration Petition No.441/2015Referred¶33
1 provisions across 1 enactments
C. L. NAIDU LITTER FLOWER
EDU SMART SERVICES PVT LTD
MANMOHAN SINGH
V. KAMESWAR RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court