Allowed

Raj Kumar Mishra and 3 Ors. v. M/S Eastern Cargo Movers and Anr.

Gauhati HC1 Sept 2022Arb.A./4/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An appeal was filed challenging an ex-parte injunction order passed under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act. The High Court directed the lower court to dispose of the pending Section 9 proceedings quickly and await further orders while the appeal was disposed without merits.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of with direction to lower court to dispose of Misc. Arb. Case No. 08/2022 under Section 9 of Arbitration Act by Sept 2022.

Raj Kumar Mishra and 3 Ors. Vs M/S Eastern Cargo Movers and Anr. — Arbitration | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010033242022

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : Arb.A./4/2022

¶5

RAJ KUMAR MISHRA AND 3 ORS. S/O SRI SITARAM MISHRA,

¶6

RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 89, NRIPEN BORA PATH, FATASHIL AMBARI, PS FATASHIL AMBARI, PO FATASHIL AMBARI, GUWAHATI 781025, ASSAM

¶7

2: SRI RAJESH KUMAR MISHRA S/O SITARAM MISHRA

¶8

RESIDENT OF ASHIRBAD KUTIR FLAT NO. 1(B) HOUSE NO. 1 BISHNUJYOTI PATH FATASHIL AMBARI PS FATASHIL AMBARI PO FATASHIL AMBARI GUWAHATI 781025 ASSAM

¶9

3: SRI ANIL KUMAR MISHRA S/O SRI SITARAM MISHRA

¶10

RESIDENT OF C/O M/S ON TRACK SOLUTION ABOVE BANK OF BARODA FATASIL AMBARI BRANCH AMBARI TINAILI FATASHIL AMBARI PS FATASHIL AMBARI PO FATASHIL AMBARI GUWAHATI 781025 ASSAM

¶11

Page No.# 2/5

¶12

4: SRI SITARAM MISHRA S/O LATE GHURAN MISHRA

¶13

RESIDENT OF C/O M/S ON TRACK SOLUTION ABOVE BANK OF BARODA FATASIL AMBARI BRANCH AMBARI TINAILI FATASHIL AMBARI PS FATASHIL AMBARI PO FATASHIL AMBARI GUWAHATI 781025 ASSA

¶14

VERSUS

¶15

M/S EASTERN CARGO MOVERS AND ANR.

¶16

A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SRI NATWAR LAL MISHRA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT PITTAL KARKHANA COMPOUND. BISHNUPUR, MAIN ROAD, GUWAHATI 781016

¶17

2:SRI NATWAR LAL MISHRA

¶18

PARTNER M/S EASTERN CARGO MOVERS. SON OF SITARAM MISHRA RESIDENT OF FLAT NO. D6 LAKE VIEW APARTMENT DHARAPUR CHARIALI GUWAHATI 78101

¶19

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR Z MUKIT

¶20

Advocate for the Respondent : MR P SHARMAH

¶21

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Date : 01.09.2022

¶24

Heard Mr. Z. Mukit, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellants and Mr. P. Sharmah, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents.

¶25

Page No.# 3/5

¶26

This is an appeal filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the “Act of 1996) challenging the ex-parte order of injunction dated 03.02.2022 passed under Section 9 of the Act of 1996.

¶27

A perusal of the said order dated 03.02.2022 shows that the Court below has directed the parties to maintain status quo and further directed the Respondents not to use six numbers of vehicles bearing Registration Nos. AS01JC-7329, AS01-JC-7338, AS01-JC-7374, AS01-JC-7509, AS01-JC-7545 and AS01FC-0426 till the constitution of the arbitral Tribunal. On a specific query being made to the learned counsels for the parties as to whether the arbitral Tribunal has been constituted, it has been submitted that the application under Section 11 of the Act of 1996 is still pending before this Court.

¶28

The learned counsel for the Appellants submits that the order so passed has caused great inconvenience to the Appellants and under such circumstances, the Appellants have approached this Court seeking redressal against the impugned order. He further submits that the written objection to the application under Section 9 of the Act of 1996 have already been filed before the Court below. However, in view of the facts that the records have been called for by this Court, the Court below has not been able to deal with the said proceedings under Section 9 of the Act of 1996.

¶29

I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and also perused the materials on record. Taking into account that the order has been passed at the initial stage and the proceedings under Section 9 are still pending, this Court is not inclined to enter into the merits at this stage rather this Court is of the opinion that the interest of justice would be met if the Court below i.e. the Court of the Additional District Judge No.3 (FTC), Kamrup (M) Guwahati is directed to dispose of the proceedings i.e. Misc. Arb. Case No. 08/2022 under Section 9 of

¶30

Page No.# 4/5

¶31

the Act of 1996 as early as possible and preferably within the month of September, 2022 and more so, when the pleadings between the parties are already complete before the Court below.

¶32

The learned counsel for the Appellants further submits that during the pendency of the said proceedings i.e. Misc. Arb. Case No. 08/2022, there has been certain developments inasmuch as a suit which was being filed by the Respondents/the Applicants in Misc. Arb. Case No. 08/2022 have been withdrawn and 3 writ petitions so filed between the parties, there are certain orders being passed by this Court which needs to be brought to the attention of the Court below. The said orders being judicial orders, this Court is of the opinion that the said orders can very well be placed before the Court below by way of an affidavit and the Court below shall take judicial notice of that and shall appreciate the same taking into consideration its relevancy to the dispute.

¶33

In view of the above, this Court therefore disposes of the instant appeal with a direction to the parties to appear before the Court of the Additional District Judge No.3 (FTC), Kamrup (M), Guwahati on 07.09.2022.

¶34

The Registry is directed to forthwith return the records through a special messenger to the Court below so that the matter can be taken up on 07.09.2022. Further taking into consideration the urgency and inconvenience expressed, this Court directs the Court below i.e. the Court of the Additional District Judge, No.3 (FTC), Kamrup (M) Guwahati to dispose of the said proceedings i.e. Misc. Arb. Case No. 08/2022 as expeditiously as possible and preferably by the end of the month of September, 2022.

¶35

The Court below while deciding the said proceedings shall not be influenced by the observations made hereinabove as well as the observations in

¶36

Page No.# 5/5

¶37

the impugned order dated 03.02.2022.

¶38

With above observations and directions the instant appeal stands disposed

¶39

of.

¶40

JUDGE

¶41

Comparing Assistant

Raj Kumar Mishra and 3 Ors. v. M/S Eastern Cargo Movers and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar Mishra and 3 Ors. v. M/S Eastern Cargo Movers and Anr.

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

Ataur Rahman Choudhury Vs the Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. and 9 Ors.

Dipandwita Borah Barman @ Dipandwita Barman Vs Jogendra Barman

National Insurance Company Limited. Vs Smt. Deepashree Baruah and 5 Ors.

Union of India Vs Kangan Dutta and Anr.

Jotika Haldar Vs Tapan Barman

Simi Borgohain Vs Bitupan Gogoi