In an arbitration petition, the Court held that since an earlier petition was dismissed for default, the appropriate remedy is restoration. The instant petition was closed, with liberty granted to file an application for restoration of the earlier petition.
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.
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010051132023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Arb.P./12/2023
M/S JAY BHAWANI VINAYAK TRADING
(REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR UTPAL BHUYAN) HOUSE NO. 30, NO.2 BASISTHAPUR, WIRELESS, RASARAJ PATH, GUWAHATI, HATIGAON, KAMRUP (METRO), ASSAM, 781028
VERSUS
GANNON DUNKERLEY AND CO. LTD.
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, HAVING ITS PROJECT OFFICE AT GDCL, C/O HEMKANTA DEHINGIA, LACHIT NAGAR, P.O. MORANHAT, P.S. MORAN, AND ITS CIVIL ENGINEERING DIVISION OFFICE AT 86A, TOPSIA ROAD (SOUTH), HAUTE STREET, 7TH FLOOR, KOLKOTA-700046, WEST BENGAL AND REGISTERED OFFICE AT NEW EXCELSIOR BUILDING (3RD FLOOR), A.K. NAYAK MARG, FORT, MUMBAI400001
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R PHUKAN Advocate for the Respondent :
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
ORDER
22-03-2023
Heard Shri P. Talukdar, learned counsel acting on instruction of Shri R. Phukan, learned counsel for the petitioner who by means of this petition as prayed for appointment of an Arbitrator.
Page No.# 2/2
The dispute appears to be of the year 2018 and the delay has been explained by the learned counsel by stating that on an earlier occasion, Arb. Pet. No. 04/2019 was filed which however was dismissed for default on 21.11.2022 with a liberty to approach this Court again if cause of action till survived.
Under those facts and circumstances and the fact that the earlier petition was dismissed for default, this Court is of the opinion that instead of a fresh petition, an application for restoration would be the appropriate remedy.
In view of the above, the instant petition is closed by giving liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate application for restoration of the earlier petition Arb. Pet. No. 04/2019.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the instant application for appointment of an arbitrator should be allowed given the existence of a previously dismissed petition.
M/S JAY BHAWANI VINAYAK TRADING
GANNON DUNKERLEY AND CO. LTD.
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
