Partly allowed

The Project Director v. Chelladurai (DIED),1).J.Riswanth

Madras HC13 Dec 2023CMP(MD)/4613/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court dismissed a petition to modify an interim stay order requiring deposit of an arbitration award, citing lack of power post-supreme court order. It granted a four-week extension for compliance before the stay automatically vacates.

What did the court decide?

Petition to modify order dated 10.02.2021 dismissed; extension of four weeks granted for deposit of award amount.

The Project Director Vs Chelladurai (DIED),1).J.Riswanth — Arbitration | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.M.A(MD)No.105 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )

¶3

Wednesday, the Thirteenth day of December Two Thousand and Twenty Three

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN and

¶6

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice P.B. BALAJI

¶7

C.M.P.(MD)Nos.4613 of 2022 and 3006 of 2021

¶8

and

¶9

C.M.A(MD)No.105 of 2021

¶10

THE PROJECT DIRECTOR NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA,83/1, SBI FIRST COLONY EXTENSION, BYE PASS ROAD, MADURAI-16

¶11

... PETITIONER/PETITIONER/ APPELLANT

IN BOTH CMPS

CHELLADURAI (DIED),

1.J.RISWANTH

2 THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY CUM DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICE,, DISTRICT COLLECTORATE BUILDING, DINDIGUL. ... RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENSTS

¶17

IN BOTH CMPS

¶18

Prayer in CMP(MD). 4613/ 2022 :

¶19

Petition filed praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court may be pleased to modify the conditional order dated 10-02-2021 passed in CMP(MD).No.922 of 2021 in CMA(MD).No.105 of 2021 and pass such further or other order deem fit in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.

¶20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

1/5

¶22

C.M.A(MD)No.105 of 2021

¶23

Prayer in CMP(MD). 3006/ 2021 :

¶24

Pleased to extend 3 months time to comply with the order made in CMP(MD) No.922 of 2021 in CMA (MD)No.105 of 2021 dated 10.02.2021 and thus render justice.

¶25

Prayer in CMA(MD). 105/ 2021 :

¶26

To set aside the order made in Aribitration O.P.No. 78 of 2011 dated 03-12-2019 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Dindigul and thus render justice.

¶27

ORDER : This petition coming up for orders on this day, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.C.ARUL VADIVEL ALAIS SEKAR, Advocate for M/S.ARUL VADIVEL ASSOCIATE, for the petitioner and of MR.H.LAKSHMI SANKAR, Advocate on behalf of the Respondents No.1, the court made the following order:-

¶28

(Order of the Court was made by RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.,)

¶29

By an order dated 10.02.2021, this Court has passed an order in C.M.P.(MD)

¶30

No.922 of 2021 in C.M.A.(MD)No.105 of 2021 and the same is extracted hereunder:

¶31

“....2.There shall be an order of interim stay on condition that the petitioner/appellant deposits the entire award amount with accrued interest and costs to the credit of Arbitration O.P.No.78 of 2011, on the file of the Principal District Court, Dindigul, on or before 24.03.2021, failing which, interim stay granted shall stand automatically vacated without further reference to this Court.”

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

2/5

¶34

C.M.A(MD)No.105 of 2021

¶35

It appears that the appellant/National Highways Authority has not complied

¶36

with the order.

¶37

Now they have come forward with two applications.

¶38

C.M.P.(MD)No.4613 of 2022 is filed to modify the order dated 10.02.2021 in

¶39

C.M.P.(MD)No.922 of 2021.

¶40

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the respondents.

¶41

At para No.4 of the affidavit filed in support of the said petition in C.M.P. (MD)No.4613 of 2022, the learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that by virtue

¶42

of the subsequent order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, there is no power of modification of award existing under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 and such a thing would amount to crossing of “Lakshman Rekha”. The order in C.M.P.(MD)No.922 of 2021 was passed on 10.02.2021. If the petitioner is aggrieved against that order, it is always open to them to agitate the matter in the manner known to law. Hence, we find no reasons to modify the order, dated 10.02.2021.

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

3/5

¶45

C.M.A(MD)No.105 of 2021

¶46

The petition in C.M.P.(MD)No.4613 of 2022 is dismissed accordingly.

¶47

As stated supra, by an order dated 10.02.2021, wherein, the Hon'ble Division

¶48

Bench of this Court has categorically stated that if the condition order of deposit is not made on or before 24.03.2021, the interim stay granted shall stand automatically vacated without further reference to this Court. We find that C.M.P.(MD)No.3006 of 2021 for extension of time of the said order is filed on a day prior to the said expiry date, namely, 22.03.2021. Though two years are passed, they have not complied with the order on the technical grounds. Since the petition for extension of time is filed in time, we are inclined to grant further extension of time only to an extent of four weeks alone, failing which, the stay granted will stand automatically vacated. It is further made clear that no further extension of time petition for further extension will not be entertained at any cost.

¶49

C.M.P(MD)No.3006 of 2021 is ordered accordingly.

¶50

sd/13/12/2023

¶51

/ TRUE COPY /

¶52

/12/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶53

sji

¶54

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶55

4/5

¶56

C.M.A(MD)No.105 of 2021

¶57

¶58

THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE, DINDIGUL

¶59

COPY TO

¶60

THE BRANCH MANAGER INDIAN BANK, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶61

ORDER IN C.M.P.(MD)Nos.4613 of 2022 and 3006 of 2021 and C.M.A(MD)No.105 of 2021 Date :13/12/2023

¶62

C.M.P.(MD)Nos.4613 of 2022 and 3006 of 2021

¶63

RK/VR (18/12/2023) 5P /3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023

¶64

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶65

5/5

The Project Director v. Chelladurai (DIED),1).J.Riswanth

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Project Director v. Chelladurai (DIED),1).J.Riswanth

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Pichaiah Vs G.Radhakrishnan

Radha, Vs Amirtha Gowri

R.Pannerselvam Vs G.Amutha

The Branch Manager Vs S.Geetha

Sasi, Vs Vellaikannu

The Managing Director Vs Vijayalakshmi