Dismissed¶24

Anu Consultanats v. Powergear Limited

Madras HC16 May 2025OSA(CAD)/57/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maintainability of original side appeal against Section 29(A)(4) extension-of-time order under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; dismissal based on judgment dated 04.02.2021 in O.S.A.No.48 of 2021; Section 34 challenge reserved for post-award stage; parties Anu Consultants (appellant) vs Powergear Limited (respondent); counsel T.V. Lakshmanan, Sricharan Rangarajan (Sr.), K. Gowtham Kumar; Madras High Court Commercial Appellate Division; decided 16.05.2025; connected C.M.P.No.12009 of 2025 closed; no costs awarded.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed without adjudicating the second-extension grievance; liberty given to the appellant to raise the plea in the event of the award going against him, via a petition under Section 34; no costs; connected C.M.P.No.12009 of 2025 stands closed. ¶24

Anu Consultanats Vs Powergear Limited — Arbitration | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

O.S.A. (CAD) No.57 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 16.05.2025

¶4

CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.R. SWAMINATHAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶5

O.S.A. (CAD) No.57 of 2025 and C.M.P.No.12009 of 2025

¶6

Anu Consultants represented by its Proprietor D. Simon Amallraja 104-A Lake View Residency Sainikpuri Secunderabad 500 094 Appellant

¶7

vs.

¶8

Powergear Limited represented by its Authorised Signatory R. Ramesh Kumar Plot B-33, Phase II, V Maiin Road MEPZ ZEZ Tambaram Chennai 600 045

¶9

Respondent

¶10

For appellant Mr. T.V. Lakshmanan For respondent Mr. Sricharan Rangarajan Sr. Counsel for Mr. K. Gowtham Kumar - - - - -

¶11

JUDGMENT

¶12

(made by G.R. SWAMINATHAN, J.)

¶13

Heard Mr. T.V. Lakshmanan, learned counsel for the appellant

¶14

and Mr. Sricharan Rangarajan, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr.K. Gowtham Kumar, learned counsel on record for the respondent.

¶15

Page Nos.1/3

¶16

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

¶17

O.S.A. (CAD) No.57 of 2025

¶18

This original side appeal is directed against the order dated

¶19

05.02.2025 in Application No.101 of 2025 granting extension of time under Section 29(A)(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶20

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the

¶21

learned Single Judge should not have granted second extension of time.

¶22

Be that as it may, in view of the judgment dated

¶23

04.02.2021 made in O.S.A.No.48 of 2021, this original side appeal is not maintainable. Accordingly, this original side appeal stands dismissed. However, liberty is given to the appellant to raise this plea

¶24

in the event of the award going against the appellant and he challenging the same by filing a petition under Section 34, ibid. No costs. Connected C.M.P. stands closed.

¶25

(G.R.S.,J.) (V.L.N.,J.) 16.05.2025

¶26

cad

¶27

Page Nos.2/3

¶28

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

¶29

O.S.A. (CAD) No.57 of 2025

¶30

G.R. SWAMINATHAN, J.