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

2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 12614

HIGH COURT OF DELHI
SHUTHAM ELECTRIC LTD. – Appellant
Versus
VAIBHAV RAHEJA & ANR. – Respondent


J U D G M E N T

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

I.A. 22291/2023 (Exemption)

1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application stands disposed of. I.A.22292/2023 (Condonation of delay)

3. The application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking condonation of delay of 37 days in refiling the accompanying Petition.

4. For the reasons stated and in the interest of justice, the delay of 37 days‟ in re-filing the accompanying Petition is condoned. The application is accordingly allowed.

O.M.P. 1/2023

5. The Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), has been filed by the petitioner, (who was the respondent No.1 in the Arbitral proceedings, hereinafter referred to as the ‘petitioner’) to set-aside the Award dated 02.05.2023, passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator.

6. Briefly stated, the petitioner/Shutham Electric Ltd., and its sister concerns had secured advances/loans from the Greater Bombay Co- operative Bank Ltd. (“GBCB”) against the mortgage of two properties. One of the properties was a residential bungalow with a garage situated at Sub Plot No. 6, Galaxy Co-operative Housing Society Limited, Pune,

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