The court disposed of arbitration petition ARB No.286 of 2022 on the ground that an arbitrator had been appointed during its pendency, leaving nothing to decide.
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.
250
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ARB No.286 of 2022(O&M) Date of Decision: 14.12.2022
M/s Mehta and Company
-Petitioner
Versus Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board and others
-Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH
Present: Mr. Dinesh Maurya, Advocate for Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Prateek Mahajan, Advocate, Mr. Daanish Mahajan, Advocate and Mr. Jaskirat Singh, Advocate for the respondents.
RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J. (Oral)
Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that during pendency of the present petition, Mr. Satbir Singh (Retd.), Superintending Engineer, PWD (B&R), Haryana has been appointed as sole Arbitrator, therefore, nothing survives in this petition.
Disposed of as such.
14.12.2022 (RAJ MOHAN SINGH) Prince JUDGE
PRINCE SAINI 2022.12.14 17.47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
M/s Mehta and Company
Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board and others
Raj Mohan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
