Allowed

M/s. Haricons Engineers and Contractors v. Sri. Gurijala Sudhakar Reddy

Telangana HC21 Apr 2022COMCA/3/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an appeal filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The Court allowed liberty to the appellant to file an application before the Arbitrator appointed in the matter, considering steps were taken for institutional arbitration.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file appropriate application before the Arbitrator appointed in the matter.

M/s. Haricons Engineers and Contractors Vs Sri. Gurijala… — Arbitration | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH^{CHANDRA SHARMA} AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUST]CE ABHINAND KUMAR^SHAVILI

¶6

COMMERC IAL COURT APPEAL NO: 3 OF²⁰²²

¶7

Appeal Under Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation^{Act 1996 R/w.} Section 13 of the Commerciat Courts,^{CommercialDivision and Commercial} Appellate Division of High Courts Act,^{2015aggrieved by the order dated} 29-10-2021 in C.O.P. No.28 ol^2O21 on the^{file of the Court of the SpecialCourt} for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes^{at Hyderabad.}

¶8

Between:

¶9

l//s. Haricons Engineers and Contractors, Represented^{by its Managing Partn_er Shri} Kommi Chandrashekar, a Company incorporated^{and having registeredoffice at} Shop No.1,3rd floor, Shindhe Complex,Neeligin^{Road, Hubli- 580 029. Havingits} branch office at H. No. 1-1-1821BM1509, Bhavyas^{lvlajestic Enclave, Madhavanagar} Colony, I/iyapur, Hyderabad 500 049. Represented^{by its Authorized representative} Shri tvt. tvlurali Krishna Reddy Email. [email protected]

¶10

...APPELLANT/ Petitioner

¶11

AND

¶12

'1. Sri. Gurijala Sudhakar Reddy, S/o. Late G.Nagi Reddy, Aged about 52 years, Occ. Brisiness,Rl/o. Flat No. 106, Vayu^{Block, ltly Home Navadweepa, Hi} Tech City, Opposite NIFT, Madhapur, Hyderabad - 500 081^Email. Shilpahydaccl @gmail.com.

¶13

r Smt. Guri.jala Sailaja, W/o. Sri. Gurijala Sudhakar Reddy,^{Agedabout 47} ,^years, Occ. Business^{Rlio.Flat No.106,Vayu Block,Ivly HomeNavadweepa,} Hi Tech City, Opposite NIFT, Madhapur, Hyderabad - 500 081^Email. shilpahydacc'l @gmail.com.

¶14

IM/s. Shilpa Electrical lnfra Tech (lndia) Private Limited,^(Formerly Known^as Shilpa Electrical Engineers (lndia) Private Limited)A Company^registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its registered office at Flat No.³

¶15

. and 20, Soni Business Complex, Prasanthi Nagar, lDA, Kukatpaily, , Hyderabad - 5O0 072. Represented by its^lr.4anaging Director Sri.^Guri.iala Sudhakar Reddy. Email. [email protected].

¶16

...RESPONDENTS/ Respondents

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶18

Applicatin under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC Read with Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 praying that in the circumstances stated in the accompanying, the High Court may be pleased to grant injunction restraining the respondents 1 to 3 herein or their agents or their henchmen or any third party claiming under them or in any form over the property admeasuring 750 sq. yds., out of 1000 sq. yds., situated in part of survey no. 11133, at Khanamet Village, Serilingampally lvlandal, Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the main appeal.

¶19

Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. G. KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY

¶20

Counsel for Respondents: SRI VADDIREDDY CHINNA NARAYANA REDDY

¶21

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶22

¶23

HEH N'BL TH IEF I E SH D R AND

¶24

THE HON' BLE SRI IUSTI CE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI COMCA. o.3of 2022

¶25

UD M NT: (l/ lk t lu hL /h (.hnl lrltit :d/i J, ata,.t,tt |tamd)

¶26

1'hc present appcal is arising out of order datcd 29.10.2021, passcd bv thc Judgc, Spccial court for Triar and Disposar of Commcrcial nisputcs at I lvderabad, in C.O.P.No.28 of 2021. Learned counsel for thc appcllanr was lair cnough in stating before this Court that he has taken steps for c.nsdtuti.n of Arbitral rribunal and therefore, a riberty be grantccr t. thc appcllant to file appropriate application before the Arbitrator appointerl in tire ntattcr.

¶27

'l'hc :\ppeal stands disposed of with the afotcsaid libcrtr..

¶28

It is madc clear that the observadons made by rhc courr bclorv rvill .()t c()rnc in war, .f thc appellant in case any applicati.n is prclcrrccl l;cfirrc thc \ rbrtraror.

¶29

No costs.

¶30

\s a scqucl, misccllancous pedtions, pcnding li rrnr., st:rncl rlisrrrisscd.

¶31

SD/.B.S.CHIRANJEEVI

¶32

JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// 4t, To sEcTtoN OFFTCER ' Iffii!fi:f'^{courtforrrialand Disposalof commerciarDisputesar}

¶33

1. one One CC cc ro SRr. to SRt. c. KALY4N CHAKRAVARTHY, Advocare tOpUCl IoPUCI 'ADDTREDDi^{iiiNnIiiiiiA?,{iiA RE;dV, Xo,-o.,,.} 4. Two CD Cooies

¶34

One Spare boov Kul obr ttrix

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2110412022

JUDGMENT

1 $f, sTAt€ <br>""'ri<br>t
2 B iul 2[l2 (;i
\i:"
I
V_*J;

¶39

COMCA.No.3 of 2022

¶40

¶41

DISPOSING OF THE COMCA

M/s. Haricons Engineers and Contractors v. Sri. Gurijala Sudhakar Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Haricons Engineers and Contractors v. Sri. Gurijala Sudhakar Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (Tsrtc) and 2 Others Vs Sri Malothu Nehru

Ammula Kamala Deepti Vs The State of Telangana

Prof.Dastageer Alam Vs The Registrar

Chinya Keloth, Nizamabad Dist Vs the Govt. of a.P., Hyd and Another

D.M., Tsrtc Vs Gollamandala Subba Raju and Ano.

Dr.M.Ravikanth Vs The State of Telangana