Petitioner borrowed money and challenged an order under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act in Delhi. The proceeding under Section 9 was withdrawn by the opposite party financer, leading to dismissal of the writ petition.
Disposal of the writ petition due to withdrawal of the underlying Section 9 proceedings.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.21583 of 2021
(Through hybrid mode)
Ashok Kumar Tripathy …. Petitioner
Ms. P.P.Mohanty, Advocate
-versus-
The sole Arbitrator and others
…. Opposite Parties
Mr. R.C.Panigrahi, Advocate (O.P. nos.2 and 3)
CORAM: JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
ORDER
29.11.2021
Order No.
04.
(Arindam Sinha)
Judge
RKS
Page 1 of 1
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
nullReferred
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ashok Kumar Tripathy
The sole Arbitrator
Opposite Parties
Arindam Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
