Allowed

Gurchet Singh and Ors. v. Punsup and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Jan 2012TA/633/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge oral order disposed of an application under Section 24 CPC. The court transferred an objection petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act from the Additional District Judge, Sangrur, to the District Judge, Chandigarh. The transfer was based on prior application of mind by the Chandigarh court in related arbitration proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The objection petition titled 'Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. Vs. M/s Satgur Industries' filed at Sangrur was transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Chandigarh within thre

Gurchet Singh and Ors. Vs Punsup and Ors. — Company and Corporate | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

TA No.633 of 2011

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

TA No.633 of 2011

¶5

Date of decision : 03.01.2012

¶6

Gurchet Singh and others

¶7

...Applicants

¶8

Versus

¶9

The Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. (PUNSUP) and others

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN

¶12

Present: Mr. Vikas Singh, Advocate for the applicants.

¶13

Mr. R.S. Dadwal, Advocate, for Mr. Aman Chaudhary, Advocate, for the respondent No.1.

¶14

JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral)

¶15

The present application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, is for transfer of the Objection Petition titled as ‘Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. Vs. M/s Satgur Industries’ (Annexure P-2) moved by respondent No.1 under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, (for short `the Act') against the Award dated 12.6.2011, passed by respondent No.2, the sole Arbitrator, from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Sangrur, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Chandigarh.

¶16

The learned counsel for the applicant contends that the

¶17

TA No.633 of 2011 2

¶18

Court at Chandigarh has already applied its mind in the proceedings previously carried out between the parties. The subject matter of both the petitions at Chandigarh and Sangrur is the same and the determination of rights in one petition is essentially connected to the determination of rights in the other. The arbitration proceedings were carried out at Chandigarh. The head office of respondent No.1 is located at Chandigarh.

¶19

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent contends that the suit filed by it is prior in time. A huge record is to be moved from Sangrur to Chandigarh and it will be inconvenient for the witnesses to come to Chandigarh.

¶20

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.

¶21

From the perusal of the record, it emerges that the Court at Chandigarh has already applied its mind, whereas the proceedings at Sangrur are at the initial stage. The subject matter being the same, the result in one would certainly affect the outcome of the other. The parties have appeared before the Arbitrator at Chandigarh. The proceedings involved are in the nature of arbitration wherein no evidence is required to be led.

¶22

As no objection was raised by the respondent during the arbitral proceedings and the Court at Chandigarh has already applied its mind, thus, this Court feels that the dispute is likely to be settled in much shorter period in case the petition (Annexure P-2) filed at Sangrur by respondent No.1 is transferred to the Court of competent

¶23

TA No.633 of 2011

¶24

¶25

jurisdiction at Chandigarh.

¶26

In view of the above, the present application is allowed, the petition titled as ‘Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. Vs. M/s Satgur Industries’ (Annexure P-2) is withdrawn from the Court of Additional District Judge, Sangrur, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Chandigarh. The trial Court at Sangrur shall send the entire record pertaining to the petition (Annexure P-2) to the learned District Judge, Chandigarh, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶27

The parties, through their counsel, shall appear before the learned District Judge, Chandigarh, on 04.02.2012 at 10.00 a.m.

¶28

03.01.2012 atulsethi

¶29

(JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE

¶30

Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No

Gurchet Singh and Ors. v. Punsup and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurchet Singh and Ors. v. Punsup and Ors.

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

Sharanjit Kaur and Ors. Vs Avtar Singh and Ors.

Sharanjit Kaur Vs Avtar Singh and Ors.

Phool Singh Vs Arjun Singh & Ors.

Latif Vs Afsana and Ors.

Afsana and Ors. Vs Azad and Ors.

Bhoti Devi Vs Bir Singh