Allowed

M/S S.N.M. Enterprises v. District Collector, Jaipur

Rajasthan HC8 Jul 2026WMAP/209/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants sought recall of an earlier court order issued on the mistaken belief that an appeal against an arbitral award had been dismissed on merits; the appeal had been dismissed in default and restored. The court recalled the earlier order and restored the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 03.01.2024 recalled; writ petition No.20601/2023 restored to its original number.

M/S S.N.M. Enterprises Vs District Collector, Jaipur — Arbitration | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:25588]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Writ Miscellaneous Application No. 209/2024 URN: WMAP / 425U / 2024

¶4

¶5

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.20601/2023

¶6

M/s S.N.M. Enterprises, Kheriya, Punjabipura, Old Cantonment, Moti Jheel, Gwalior - 476010 (M.P.) Through Proprietor Shiv Pratap Singh Son Of Sh. Harnam Singh Chouhan Aged About 50 Years, Kheriya, Punjabipura, Old Cantonment, Moti Jheel, Gwalior - 476010 (M.P.)

¶7

----Non-applicant/Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

District Collector, Jaipur, Office Of District Collector, Collectorate Circle, Bani Park, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶10

Additional District Collector And Additional District Magistrate (3Rd), And Officer-In-Charge (Recovery), Office Of District Collector, Collectorate Circle, Bani Park, Jaipur (Raj.).

¶11

...Non-applicant/respondents

¶12

M/s Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mills Ltd, Through Its Director-In-Charge, 4Th Floor, Bhawani Singh Road, Nehru Sahakar Bhawan, Jaipur- 302006 (Raj.)

¶13

M/s Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mills Ltd, Through Its Deputy General Manager (Purchase) 4Th Floor, Bhawani Singh Road, Nehru Sahakar Bhawan, Jaipur302006 (Raj.)

¶14

----Applicants-Respondents

¶15

For Applicant(s)	: Mr. Arpit Dotasra for
	Mr. ManojKumar Bharadwaj
For Non-applicant(s)	: Mr. VijayMathur

¶16

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶17

Order

¶18

08/07/2026

¶19

By way of filing the instant writ misc. application, a prayer has been made for recall of the order dated 03.01.2024 passed by

(2 of 3)

[2026:RJ-JP:25588]

[WMAP-209/2024]

this Court while deciding S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.20601/2023, submitted by the non-applicant/petitioner-M/s.S.N.M. Enterprises. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicantrespondent-M/s Rajasthan State Ganganager Sugar Mills Ltd. submits that the correct facts were not brought into the notice of this Court when the matter was being heard on 03.01.2024. Counsel submits that an argument was raised by the petitioner at the relevant time that the appeal preferred against the arbitral award dated 04.09.2017 was dismissed and on this count alone the order dated 03.01.2024 was passed issuing directions to the Additional Collector (Recovery), Collectorate Jaipur to proceed with the matter in accordance with law.

¶24

Counsel submits that in-fact the aforesaid appeal submitted against the impugned award dated 04.09.2017 was dismissed in default, but the same was not dismissed on its merits and later on, a restoration application was submitted which was allowed and the appeal was restored to is original number. The Appellate Authority directed the non-applicant/petitioner to deposit 75% of the arbitral award and the appeal is still lying pending for adjudication on its merits. Hence, under these circumstances, the impugned order dated 03.01.2024 be recalled and the S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.20601/2023 be restored to its original number.

¶25

Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the nonapplicant/petitioner-M/s S.N.M. Enterprises opposed the prayer and submitted that when the order was passed on 03.01.2024, the appeal was not restored. Counsel submits that the appeal was restored on 19.01.2024, hence, there is no reason to recall the

(3 of 3)

[2026:RJ-JP:25588]

[WMAP-209/2024]

order dated 03.01.2024 and the instant application seeking recall of the order dated 03.01.2024 be rejected.

¶30

Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record.

¶31

Considering the arguments put forward by leaned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the appeal against the arbitral award dated 04.09.2017 was not dismissed on its merits, but the same was dismissed in default and it was restored to its original number on 19.01.2024 and an interim order has already been passed in favour of the applicant by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 25.10.2024, the matter is required to be heard and decided on its merits.

¶32

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the instant writ misc. application stands allowed. The order dated 03.01.2024 passed by this Court stands recalled. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.20601/2023 is ordered to be restored to its original number.

¶33

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶34

KuD/55

M/S S.N.M. Enterprises v. District Collector, Jaipur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S S.N.M. Enterprises v. District Collector, Jaipur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukesh Kumar Meena S/O Late Gopal, Vs State of Rajasthan

Narendra Singh S/O Karan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajesh Kumar Verma S/O Bhanwar Lal Verma Vs State of Rajasthan

Sanjay Son of Mohan Lal, Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramji Lal S/O Late Shri Jagdish Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Imran Son of Shri Iqbal Vs State of Rajasthan