Remanded

Ruchika Agarwal (Prop.) M/S Sangeeta Furniture Concepts v. v P Sharma Advocate & Anr.

Delhi HC6 Feb 2024W.P.(C)/1245/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging an arbitration order dismissing an application to terminate proceedings due to MSME registration status. Court held application should not have been dismissed on procedural grounds and remanded to arbitrator. Petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 11.01.2024 of the Sole Arbitrator set aside; application remanded to Arbitrator for consideration on merits. Writ petition disposed of.

Ruchika Agarwal (Prop.) M/S Sangeeta Furniture Concepts Vs v P… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~81

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 1245/2024 & CM APPL. 5217/2024 RUCHIKA AGARWAL (PROP.) M/S SANGEETA FURNITURE CONCEPTS ..... Petitioner

¶4

Through: Mr. Anirudh Gupta, Advocate.

¶5

versus

¶6

V P SHARMA ADVOCATE & ANR. ..... Respondents

¶7

Through: Mr. Avadh Kaushik and Ms. Saloni Mahajan, Advocates for R-2.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

¶9

O R D E R % 06.02.2024

¶10

The Petitioner has challenged the Order dated 11.01.2024 passed by the Respondent No.1/Ld. Sole Arbitrator.

¶11

It is the case of the Petitioner that the present arbitration proceedings cannot be continued for the reason that the goods have been supplied prior to the Petitioner’s being registered as an MSME. It is the contention of the Petitioner that there is no decision on the application filed by the Petitioner for terminating the arbitration proceedings other than stating that an incomplete application has been filed by the Petitioner/claimant’s Counsel as the Vakalatnama as well as the Power of Attorney has not been along with the application.

¶12

It is stated that the Vakalatnama as well as Power of Attorney has been filed with the Claims Statement. This Court is of the opinion that the

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/12/2024 at 14:40:01

¶14

application ought not to have been dismissed on the aforesaid reasons. The Order dated 11.01.2024 is set aside. The Ld. Arbitrator is requested to consider the application of the Petitioner on merits and pass appropriate Orders, after hearing the parties, in accordance with law.

¶15

The writ petition is disposed of, along with pending application(s), if

¶16

any.

¶17

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J

¶18

FEBRUARY 6, 2024 S. Zakir

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/12/2024 at 14:40:01

Ruchika Agarwal (Prop.) M/S Sangeeta Furniture Concepts v. v P Sharma Advocate & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ruchika Agarwal (Prop.) M/S Sangeeta Furniture Concepts v. v P Sharma Advocate & Anr.

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

Hemlata Gupta Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Ruchi Goyal Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Imrat Singh Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi through Commissioner & Ors.

Kameshwar Kumar Rai & Ors. Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.

La Tropicana Residents Association Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Rajnish Mishra and Ors. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Aditya Malhotra & Anr. Vs Canara Bank & Anr.

Neeraj Paper Marketing Limited Vs Sales Tax Officer Class Ii, New Delhi

S Vs the Union of India & Ors.

Krishan Kumar Dahiya Vs the Secretary (P), Dopt & Anr.

Ms. (a) Vs Delhi Cantonment General Hospital & Ors.

Ashok Kumar Madiyan Vs Government of N.C.T of Delhi

K R Anand Vs Delhi Metro Rail Corporation & Ors.

Rohtas Jaiswal & Anr. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.