SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(Del) 1040

SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA
MCD – Appellant
Versus
KAMLA VALVES MANUFACTURING – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Through : Mr. Ashok Bhasin, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Sadhna Sharma, Adv.
Through: Mr.Anil Kr. Mishra with Mr. D.Samanta, Advs.

ORDER

1. During pendency of the suit under Sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, the defendant no.1 filed an IA No.3990/00 raising objections against the award. These objections of the objector/applicant were dismissed in default on 10th April, 2001. The applicant filed an OA No.4678/01 under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC to set aside the order dated 10th April, 2001. Again none appeared to prosecute this OA No.4678/01 and this application was dismissed in default on 3rd September, 2002. Applicant then filed second application, i.e., IA No.10053/02 under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC to set aside the order dated 10th April, 01. This application was also dismissed in default on 30th October, 2002. From 30th October, 2002 till 2006 the applicant kept sleeping coolly. Then third IA No.13816/06 under Order 9 rule 13 was made by the applicant for setting aside the order dated 10th April, 2001. This application was also dismissed in default on 24th September, 2007 and thereafter applicant made two applications bearing IA No.13815/06 under Section 5 to condone the delay in filing fourth application no.13816/06 under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC. This application 13815/06 was dismissed in default on 24th Se



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top