Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY
Anil Buildcon (India) Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Essal Infrastruture (Pvt.) Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition challenged rejection (Para 1 , 3 , 7) |
| 2. arguments on appealability (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's opinion on maintainability (Para 6 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. legal precedents on appeal (Para 10 , 11) |
ORDER :
Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J.
1. The petitioner has challenged an order passed by the learned Commercial Court (District Judge Level) in MJC No. 4 of 2024, dated 31.7.2024, whereby an application moved under Order 9 Rule 9 read with Section 151 of CPC has been dismissed.
2. A specific query was raised as to whether a Miscellaneous Appeal under provisions of Order 43 Rule 1(c) of CPC would lie against the rejection of an application moved under Order 9 Rule 9 of CPC or not?
3. In the present case, an award was passed on 4.4.2021 by the Arbitrator against the petitioner. An application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 , was moved before the learned Commercial Court, Raipur, to set aside the said award. The petition filed under Section 34 of the Act, 1996, was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 14.10.2022. Thereafter, an application for restoration under Order 9 Rule 9, read with Section 151 of CPC, along with an application for condon
A miscellaneous appeal lies against rejection of an application under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC; writ under Article 227 is not maintainable due to the statutory remedy.
Granting or refusing to grant any measure and set aside an arbitral award - No final adjudication of Section 9 application nor does impugned order finally decide same - Decision in application under ....
Partial compliance with an award cannot preclude a party's right to challenge it; procedural fairness demands a considered and reasoned approach from the court.
Partial compliance with an award does not negate the right to challenge it under Section 34; procedural fairness necessitates notice before dismissing applications.
Appeals under the Commercial Courts Act must strictly adhere to specified provisions; orders under Section 151 of the CPC are not appealable as they fall outside established criteria.
Venue of arbitration does not equate to its jurisdictional seat; petitions under the Arbitration Act must be filed where arbitration took place, as established in prior Supreme Court rulings.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
