In Commercial Court Appeal No. 19 of 2018, the High Court dismissed the appeal as infructuous on the assurance of the appellant's counsel without detailed discussion.
The appeal was disposed of as infructuous; miscellaneous petitions stood closed; no order as to costs.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
COMMERCIAL cou RT APPEAL NO: 19 OF 2018
Appeal Under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 20i5 read with Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 aggrieved by the order dated 28.07.2017 in C.O.P,No. 105 of 2017 on the file of the Commercial Court cum XXIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Courts at Hyderabad.
Between:
It/is.S.N.Enviro-Tech Pvt. Ltd., Having its registered office at F-90/32, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-'1 , New Delhi,- 110020 Represented by its Auihorlsed 9,91"!oryMr.P-rasanta Kumar Patra S/o late Shri Anil Baran patiaR/o L-111634, DDA Flats, Kalkaji, New Delhi ...APPELLANT/petitioner AND
It//s Megha. Engineering__an-d lnfrastructures Ltd., S-2. Technocraft lndl.Estate, Balanagar, Hyderabad.-500037 Represented by its lVanaging Director
RESPONDENT/ Respondent
lA NO: 1 OF 2018
Petition under Section 5 of Limitation Act praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 205 days in filing the COMCA.
IANO: 2OF2 018
Petition under Section 15'l CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the order of the Judgment and Decree dated 2g-07-2017 in coP No. 105 of 2017 on the file of the Hon'ble commercial court cum XXIV Additional chief Judge, city civil courts at HyderabadTpending disposal of the appeal.
Counsel for the Appellant: SRI p. RAJA SRIPATHI RAO
Counsel for the Respondent: SRI K. V. SUBBA REDDY
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON,BL D THECHIEFJUSTICESATISHCHANDRlSITARMA
AND
THE HOI 'BLE SRI JUSTICEABHINANDKUMAR SI.IA,ILI
COMCA No.19of2O18
JU DGMENT: ltr theHon'blethe Chie/Justice Sdlish ChatdraS|drmo)
Learned counselfor the appellant is fair enough in
inlorming thi;Court that the present appealhLas become
infructuous
Accordir el]',the appeal is disposed of as infructt'lot-ts'
Miscelia leouspetitions,ifany, shal1 stand closed'
There shal1be no order as to costs
SD/-M.ShNTltl VARDHANI
JOIN']" REGISTRAR
,TRUE COPY//
(JE
SI:CTION OFFICER
To,
I .TheCommercialClurtcumXX|VAdditionalChiefJudge,CityCivilCourtsat Hyderabad
. oi,L cc to oi,L cc to cc to tosRl. P RAJASRIPATHIRAo,Advocate[oPUC]
. One CC to SRl. One CC to SRl. CC to SRl. to SRl.K. /. SUBBA REDDY Advocate[OPUC]
TR
*./
HIGH COURT
DATED:04 t01l2rt22
ORDER
COMCA.No.19 o 12018
f,e :ffift<br>/ ai
,i
.y!2
DISPOSING OF THE APP] AL,ASINFRUCTUOUS.
*V,,.
Y1
c -
?<br>
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the commercial court appeal filed by the appellant should be allowed since it has become infructuous.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
It/is.S.N.Enviro-Tech Pvt. Ltd.
It//s Megha. Engineering__an-d lnfrastructures Ltd.
Satish Chandra Sharma
Abhinand Kumar Shavili
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
