The single-judge bench found that the underlying original suit was disposed of previously. Consequently, the current arbitration appeal was held to be infructuous and is dismissed.
Arbitration appeal dismissed as infructuous; costs not awarded; pending miscellaneous petitions dismissed.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN
CMA.No. 574 of 2011
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice M.S.Ramachandra Rao)
1. Heard both sides.
2. It is brought to our notice that the suit O.S.No.383 of 2009 on the file of the XIII Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court Hyderabad, which was transferred to Commercial Court-cumXXIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, and renumbered as COS.No.211 of 2017, out of which this CMA arises, itself was disposed of on 30.12.2017, and therefore, the cause in this Appeal no longer survives for adjudication.
3. In view of the said submission, this CMA is dismissed as
infructuous. No order as to costs.
stand dismissed.
____________________________ M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, J
_________________ K.LAKSHMAN, J
07th January, 2020.
gra
M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
K.LAKSHMAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
