Dismissed

Rishikant Bhardwaj v. Vikrant Suri & Ors.

Delhi HC13 Dec 2024FAO(OS) (COMM)/286/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that appeals against a consent order are not maintainable under Section 37(1)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. However, courts extended time for filing affidavits of assets and making deposits as parties had acquiesced to a minor delay.

What did the court decide?

Time granted for filing affidavit of assets and reply and for making deposit until 15.01.2025.

Rishikant Bhardwaj Vs Vikrant Suri & Ors. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~45 and 46

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- FAO(OS) (COMM) 286/2024, CM APPL. 73444/2024-Stay CM APPL. 73445/2024-Exp, CM APPL. 73446/2024-Addl.doc.

¶4

RISHIKANT BHARDWAJ .....Appellant

¶5

Through: Mr.Raghav Sood, Advocate

¶6

versus

¶7

VIKRANT SURI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr.Ishan Sachdeva, Advocate for R-1 and 2

¶8

FAO(OS) (COMM) 287/2024, CM APPL. 73447/2024-Addl.doc. CM APPL. 73448/2024-Stay, CM APPL. 73449/2024-Exp

¶9

HOLYBELLY FOOD BOUTIQUE LLP & ANR. .....Appellants

¶10

Through: Mr.Ashish Dholakia, Senior Advocate with Mr.Aman Sharma, Mr.Subhoday Banerjee, Mr.Tarun Mehra and Mr.Jayesh Sharma, Advocates

¶11

versus

¶12

VIKRANT SURI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr.Ishan Sachdeva, Advocate for R-1 and 2

¶13

CORAM:

¶14

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

¶15

O R D E R % 13.12.2024

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

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 17/12/2024 at 11:39:58

¶18

The present appeals under Section 37(1)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seek to assail the order dated 14.11.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) No. 390/2024.

¶19

At the outset, we note that the impugned order is a consent order. We are, therefore, of the view, the appellants having volunteered to make the deposit of the amount directed under the impugned order, the appeals are per se not maintainable.

¶20

When faced with this situation, learned senior counsel for the appellant prays that time be granted under the impugned order by the learned Single Judge for filing of affidavit of assets, reply and making the deposit, be extended till 15.01.2025.

¶21

Learned counsel for the respondent, who appears on advance notice, fairly does not oppose this limited request.

¶22

In the light of the aforesaid, even though we are dismissing the appeal as not being maintainable, we are, with the consent of the parties extending the time granted to the appellant for filing of the affidavit of assets and reply as also time for making the deposit in terms of paragraph 8 of the impugned order till 15.01.2025.

¶23

The appeals, alongwith the pending applications, are accordingly dismissed.

¶24

REKHA PALLI, J

¶25

SAURABH BANERJEE, J

¶26

DECEMBER 13, 2024/SV

¶27

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 17/12/2024 at 11:39:58

Rishikant Bhardwaj v. Vikrant Suri & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishikant Bhardwaj v. Vikrant Suri & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shammi Chadha Vs Sangeeta Chadha

Paretosh Jain Vs Ritika Jain

Vishesh Credits Private Limited Vs Reserve Bank of India & Anr.

Delhi Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board Vs K. Murugan & Anr.

Shiv Shankar Vs Kogta Financial India Ltd. & Ors.

Holybelly Food Boutique LLP & Anr. Vs Vikrant Suri & Ors.