Allowed

Recondo Limited v. Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd.

Gujarat HC23 Jun 2022SCA/17059/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge High Court of Gujarat observed that the petitioner seeks directions for expedited decision of a pending arbitration reference by modifying the period from three to five months, and on no objection from the respondent, directed the tribunal to decide the reference within five months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Arbitration Tribunal to decide the Arbitration Reference No.178/1996 preferably within five months. Rule made absolute.

Recondo Limited Vs Sardar Sarovar Narmada… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Gujarat HC (2022)

¶1

C/SCA/17059/2021 ORDER DATED: 23/06/2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17059 of 2021

¶4

==========================================================

¶5

RECONDO LIMITED

¶6

Versus

¶7

SARDAR SAROVAR NARMADA NIGAM LTD.

¶8

==========================================================

¶9

Appearance:

¶10

PARAS K SUKHWANI(8284) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR SANJAY A MEHTA(469) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 ==========================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA

¶12

Date : 23/06/2022 ORAL ORDER

¶13

Rule . Learned advocate appearing for the respondents waives service of notice of rule.

¶14

The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following prayers:-

¶15

“7(a) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to admit the present petition.

¶16

(b) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or directions directing Hon’ble Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal to decide the Arbitration reference No.178/1996 as expeditiously as possible and preferably within three months.”

¶17

Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of VA Tech Escher Wyass Flovel Ltd. vs. M.P.S.E. Board & Another, 2010 Arb.W.L.J. 116 (SC) the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal had no jurisdiction to adjudicate the disputes raised by the petitioner and thus, the Arbitration Reference No.178 of 1996 was disposed of vide order dated 22.11.2010, which was challenged by the respondents by filing Special Civil Application No.7171 of 2012, which was not entertained and disposed of vide order dated 11.06.2012.

¶18

Page 1 of 2

¶19

C/SCA/17059/2021 ORDER DATED: 23/06/2022

¶20

Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents had challenged the order dated 11.06.2012 by filing Letters Patent Appeal No.1368 of 2012, which was allowed vide order dated 04.02.2019. He has submitted that the Arbitration Reference No.178 of 1996 is pending for final hearing since 1996. He has also submitted that Shri Lahiri aged about 88 years, who is conversant with the facts of the case, is suffering from multiple disease and there is no one to assist for adjudication of disputes, and therefore, the Tribunal may be directed to decide the Arbitration Reference No.178 of 1996 within a period of three months.

¶21

Learned advocate for the respondents has no objection if such directions are issued.

¶22

Under the circumstances, the Tribunal is directed to decide the Arbitration Reference No.178 of 1996 preferably within a period of five months.

¶23

The matter stands disposed of accordingly. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

¶24

(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)

¶25

ABHISHEK/54

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Recondo Limited v. Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Recondo Limited v. Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Patel Shivaben Jesungbhai Vs the Executive Engineer, Uttar Gujarat Vig Company Ltd.

Shivas S/O Ankit Barot through Father Since Minor Ankit Harishbhai Barot Vs Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation

Shahezada Hanifbhai Patel Vs Regional Passport Officer

M/S. Vinod Pandya Vs State of Gujarat

Orient Abrasives Limited Vs State of Gujarat

Rajtrishul Construction Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs Chotila Municipality through Chief Officer