Dismissed

M/s.The Waterbase Limited a Company registered undet the Companies Act 1956 v. Mr.Sanaka Venkata Narasimha Rao Proprietor M/s.Sri Sai Teja Aqua Needs

Madras HC19 Nov 2020A/1914/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant moved for an order directing the respondent to deposit principal and interest funds or furnish a bank guarantee in pending arbitration proceedings. The counsel for the applicant stated that the application is withdrawn with effect from the date of filing.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs.

M/s.The Waterbase Limited a Company registered undet the… — Arbitration | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 19.11.2020

¶4

Coram

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. SUNDAR

¶6

A.No.1914 of 2020 M/s.The Waterbase Limited A company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 Rep. by its authorised signatory Mr.R.Achuthan having its Registered Office at Ananthapuram Village, Thotapalli Gudur Mandal, Nellore District – 524 344 Also at Thapar Housem, No.37 Montieth Road Egmore, Chennai – 600 008 .. Applicant Vs.

¶7

Mr.Sanaka Venkata Narasimha Rao Proprietor, M/s. Sri Sai Teja Aqua Needs S/o.Mr.SanakaParamaiah Having Office at No.7/722, Repalle Road, Karlapalem Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh – 522 111 Residing at No.3-190, Manchala, Chebrolu Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh – 522 212 ... Respondent

¶8

PRAYER: Application filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of the Madras High Court Original Side Rules,1956 read with Section 9(1)(ii)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to pass an order directing the http://www.judis.nic.in Respondent to deposit a sum of Rs.1,38,82, 538.25 (Rupees One Crore

¶9

¶10

Thirty-Eight Lakhs Eighty-Two Thousand Five Hundred Thirty-Eight and Twenty-Five Paise only) towards principal and further amount of Rs.72,62,964/- (Rupees Seventy-Two Lakhs Sixty-Two Thousand Nine Hundred and Sixty-Four only) towards interest component calculated at 21% p.a as on 29.02.2020 with this Hon'ble Court, failing which to direct Respondent to furnish a security in the form of Bank Guarantee in favour of the Applicant for a sum of Rs.1,38,82,538.25 (Rupees One Crore Thirty-Eight Lakhs Eighty-Two Thousand Five Hundred Thirty-Eight and Twenty-Five Paise only) towards principal and further amount of Rs.72,62,964/- (Rupees Seventy-Two Lakhs Sixty-Two Thousand Nine Hundred and Sixty-Four only) towards interest component calculated at 21% p.a as on 29.02.2020 and have the same renewed and in force until the completion of the arbitration proceedings.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.Adarsh Subramanian

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

Mr.Adarsh Subramanian, learned counsel on record for the applicant submits that he has instructions from the applicant to withdraw the captioned application. Learned counsel submits that a memo of withdrawal dated 19.11.2020 has been e-mail filed and the scanned copy of the same is as follows:

¶14

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶15

¶16

Contents of the aforesaid withdrawal memo are reiterated.

¶17

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶18

¶19

In the light of the narrative thus far, captioned application stands

¶20

dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶21

19.11.2020

¶22

gpa

¶23

http://www.judis.nic.in

M.SUNDAR.J.,

GPA

A.No.1914 of 2020
18.11.2020

¶28

http://www.judis.nic.in

M/s.The Waterbase Limited a Company registered undet the Companies Act 1956 v. Mr.Sanaka Venkata Narasimha Rao Proprietor M/s.Sri Sai Teja Aqua Needs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.The Waterbase Limited a Company registered undet the Companies Act 1956 v. Mr.Sanaka Venkata Narasimha Rao Proprietor M/s.Sri Sai Teja Aqua Needs

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

The Chennai Port Trust Vs M/S.Chettinad Logistics(P)

M/s.Jones Foundation Pvt. Ltd, Represented by its Managing Director, Vs G4S Secure Solutions(India)pvt.Ltd, Represented by its General Manager/Hr Head

M/S.Brushman India Limited Vs M/S.First Leasing Company

The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner cum Recovery Officer, Vs M/s. Phoenix Arc Private Ltd, Phoenix Arf Scheme-3.

The Official Liquidator, High Court Vs nil

The Official Liquidator, High Court Madras Vs nil