Partly allowed

Commissioner, Department of College Education, v. Educom Solutions Private Limited

Rajasthan HC15 May 2023CMA/22/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court permitted the appellant to withdraw its appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act, granting liberty to file a writ petition in the appropriate forum. The interim order regarding property attachment was discontinued as the new forum is competent to decide it.

What did the court decide?

Appellant permitted to withdraw appeal with liberty to file writ petition; interim order discontinued.

Commissioner, Department of College Education, Vs Educom… — Arbitration | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJP/010840]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 22/2023

¶4

Commissioner, Department Of College Education, Black-1V, Dr.s Radhakrishnan Shiksha Sankul Jawaharlal Nehru Marg-302015, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Educom Solutions Private Limited, Through Its Authorized Representative Shri Dibyvas Kar, S/o Shri Saradindu Kar, Working As Sr. Manager Having Its Registered Office At 1211, Padma Tower, 1, 5 Rajendra Place, New Delhi.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Appellant(s) : Mr.R.P.Singh, AAG with Mr.Jaivardhan Singh Shekhawat, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr.Ayush Agarwal, Adv.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶11

Order

¶12

15/05/2023

¶13

The instant misc. appeal has been filed by the appellantDepartment under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter read as ‘the Act of 1996’) read with Section 13 of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 against the order dated 26.08.2022, whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 34 of the Act of 1996 came to be dismissed on the ground of territorial jurisdiction.

¶14

This Court on 24.02.2023 condoned the delay in filing the present appeal and further passed an interim order to the extent

[2023/RJJP/010840]

[CMA-22/2023]

(2 of 4)

of not allowing any proceedings to be drawn towards the movable and immovable properties including the properties in the office of Commissioner of College Education, State of Rajasthan.

¶19

The respondent-Company has filed counter affidavit to the misc. appeal and raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the present special appeal before this Court/Division Bench.

¶20

The respondent in their preliminary objection has submitted that the present appeal filed under Section 37 of the Act of 1996 is not maintainable, as the order challenged before this Court is only a direction for the appellant to go to the appropriate forum.

¶21

Learned Additional Advocate General Major R.P.Singh appearing for the appellant submitted that in the wake of preliminary objections raised by the respondent, the appellant wants to avail the appropriate remedy by filing appropriate writ petition before the appropriate Bench.

¶22

Learned AAG submitted that since the remedy is sought by the appellant to avail the remedy before the appropriate forum and as such liberty may be granted to the appellant to file the writ petition and interim order passed by this Court, may also be allowed to continue.

¶23

Learned AAG submitted that filing of appropriate writ petition before the appropriate forum may take some time and if interim order will not continue, the appellant would suffer irreparable loss and even the office of Commissioner of College Education might be attached.

[2023/RJJP/010840]

[CMA-22/2023]

(3 of 4)

Learned counsel Mr.Ayush Agarwal appearing for the respondent submitted that if the appellant wants to avail the remedy by withdrawing the present appeal, they are always free to do so and as per law, however, continuation of interim order may not be allowed.

¶28

Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that in the present case, the appellant at two occasions had given undertaking before the Court below of paying the requisite amount as per the reward and as such no further time should be granted to them.

¶29

Learned counsel for the respondent further submitted that the issue of maintainability of the present appeal has already been decided by the Apex Court in the case of BGS SGS SOMA JV Vs. NHPC Ltd. reported in (2020) 4 SCC 234 .

¶30

We have heard the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶31

We find that the request of learned AAG to withdraw the present misc. appeal with liberty to file fresh writ petition before the appropriate Bench, deserves to be allowed. The appellant would be free to avail the remedy, as provided under the law.

¶32

This Court finds that the request of learned AAG to continue effect and operation of the interim order, would not be proper, as the writ petition, which is now going to be filed will be listed before the appropriate Bench and as such, it is for the Court concerned to consider the relevant parameters for passing the interim orders.

¶33

Learned counsel for the appellant is free to apprise the Court about passing of the interim order passed by this Court.

(4 of 4)

[2023/RJJP/010840]

[CMA-22/2023]

This Court, accordingly permits the appellant to withdraw the appeal with liberty to avail remedy and the same is dismissed accordingly with the aforesaid observations.

¶38

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR), J

¶39

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR), J

¶40

Monika/2

Commissioner, Department of College Education, v. Educom Solutions Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Commissioner, Department of College Education, v. Educom Solutions Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahesh Gupta S/O Late Sh. A.K. Gupta, Vs Nirmal Nagori

Smt. Prem Bai W/O Ashok Kumar, Vs State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary

Manisha R.A.S. Vs Advocate Umesh Kumar Gaur R/828/1993

Ajmer Singh Vs Deputy Director

Shree Krishna Vatika Homes LLP Vs Shri Indra Vijay Singh S/O Col. Shri Govind Singh Ji

The State of Rajasthan through Secretary to the Govt. Education Department Vs Shishpal S/O Munshi Ram