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

DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Saini Electrical Works – Appellant
Versus
Public Works Department – Respondent


ORDER (Oral)

(Video-Conferencing)

C. Hari Shankar, J.

ARB.P. 321/2020

1. On the attention of Mr. Sehrawat, learned counsel for the petitioner, being drawn to the fact that the protocol prescribed in Clause 25 of the Agreement between the parties has not been strictly complied with and that, therefore, invocation of Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 at this stage may not be permissible, Mr. Sehrawat seeks leave to withdraw this petition, with liberty to re-approach the Court after following the protocol prescribed in Clause 25 of the Agreement.

2. Leave and liberty is granted as prayed for.

3. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

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