Dismissed

Mohammed Akheel v. Mohammed Abdul Waheed

Telangana HC1 Jul 2022ARBAPPL/114/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a High Court Arbitration Application No. 114 of 2021 under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with Scheme 2000, the petitioner sought appointment of an arbitrator. The court, noting the absence of representation despite listing the matter for dismissal, dismissed the application for default.

What did the court decide?

Arbitration Application dismissed for default..Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, stand closed.

Mohammed Akheel Vs Mohammed Abdul Waheed — Arbitration | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA-' AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FRIDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF JULY rWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶5

ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO: 114 0F 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

Mohammed Akheel ,.S/o Abdul.Khaleel, aged about 35 years, Occ- Business, R/o H.No.19-5-479/6/10 ,^Nandi Muslaiguda, Kishan Bagh, Batiadurpura, Hyderabad.

¶8

... PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

Mohammed Abdul Waheed, S/o Mohammed Abdul Aziz, Muslim, aged about {9^{years, Occ- Business, R/oH.No.18-7-42615811,Bhavani Nagar,} Charminar, Hyderabad.

¶11

Shaik Anwar, S/o Shaik Afzal, aged about 35 years, Occ- Business, Fl/o H.No.19-2-490, Fateh Darwaza, Hyderabad, T.S. ...RESPONDENT

¶12

Arbitration Application Under Section 11 (5) & (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act^'1996 read with Scheme for Appointment of Arbitration 2000 praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to appoint an Arbrtrator to conduct Arbitral Proceedings in writing and make the arbitration award in regard to the disputes and differences that have arisen between the applicant and other^parties as per law.

¶13

lA NO: 1 oF 2021

¶14

Application under Section^{151 CPC praying that in the circumstances} stated in the accompanying^{affidavitfiledin supportof the petition,the HighCowt} may be^pleased to condone^{the delayof 75 daysin representationof the ARB} APPLN SR.NO. 15101 of 2021

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRI' MIRZA MAHMOODALI BAIG(NOT} PRESESENT)

¶16

Counsel for^{Respondents: NONEAPPEARED}

¶17

The Court made^the following:^ORDER

¶18

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K' LAKSHMAN} ARB ION CATIONNo^.L140F2021

¶19

ORDER:

¶20

Despite^{listing the matter under the caption'for} dismissal',^{thereis no representationon behalf of the petitioner'} Therefore, this^{Arbitration Applicationis dismissed for}

¶21

ciefault. There^{shallbe no order as to costs'}

¶22

As a sequel,^{MiscellaneousPetitions,' pending if any, shall}

stand closed.

//TRUE COPY//

SD/.B.S.CHIRANJEEVI JOINT REGISTRAR SECTION FFICER

¶27

To,

¶28

One CC to SRl. MIRZAMAHMOODALI BAIG, Advocate [OPUC]

¶29

Two C.D.Copies

¶30

One Spare Copy

-*-^ \

HIGH^COURT

DATED:01^10712022

ORDER

ARB.APPL.No.1^{1 4 ol 2021}

¶38

$f.
ry
o
,:) 2 5 JUL 2022
? 4

¶39

DISMISSING^{THE ARBITRATION}

¶40

APPLICATION^{FOR DEFAULT}

¶41

WITHOI]T COSTS

¶42

@#6,'

Mohammed Akheel v. Mohammed Abdul Waheed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Akheel v. Mohammed Abdul Waheed

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

Smt. Naseeha Vs State of Telangana and another

Smt. Pambanda Sunitha Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Pambanda Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Azeemullah Qureshi and 5 others Vs The State Of Telangana and another

Dara Veklesh Raj Vs The State of Telangana

Chintalapelli Ram Reddy Vs Seva Eslavath