M/S Gopinath Enterprise Pvt. Ltd vs M/S Mahadev Enterprise

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 1744 Guj
Judgement Date : 10 January, 2025

Gujarat High Court

M/S Gopinath Enterprise Pvt. Ltd vs M/S Mahadev Enterprise on 10 January, 2025

Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
                                                                                                                 NEUTRAL CITATION




                            C/ARBI.P/135/2024                                     ORDER DATED: 10/01/2025

                                                                                                                 undefined




                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                            R/PETN. UNDER ARBITRATION ACT NO. 135 of 2024
                      =============================================
                                          M/S GOPINATH ENTERPRISE PVT. LTD.
                                                        Versus
                                           M/S MAHADEV ENTERPRISE & ORS.
                      =============================================
                      Appearance:
                      PRANAV D THAKKAR(8501) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
                      VIJAYKUMAR B LIMBACHIYA(8763) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
                      NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
                      NOTICE THROUGH RPAD UNSERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                      SERVED BY RPAD (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4,5
                      =============================================
                        CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
                              SUNITA AGARWAL

                                                         Date : 10/01/2025

                                                            ORAL ORDER

1. The office report indicated that the notice was sent to all the five respondents through RPAD on 02.08.2024. Respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 are served. Respondent No.1, which is a partnership firm, was not served as the address was not correct.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also affected the service by direct mode and has filed affidavit to indicate that notice upon the Respondent Nos.3, 4 and 5 was served directly, whereas, Respondent No.2 remained unserved as he was not available at the address. Similarly, Respondent No.1 could not be served for want of address and hence, unserved.

3. Taking note of the above, it is evident that all the contesting respondents have been served. The Respondent No.1, which is a partnership firm, cannot be served because of the change of address. No one has put an appearance on behalf of any of the respondents for more than five months from the date of service of Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by MR. SAHIL SAMIULLA RANGER(HC01898) on Tue Jan 21 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 00:05:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/ARBI.P/135/2024 ORDER DATED: 10/01/2025 undefined the notice.

4. The petitioner herein is seeking for appointment of arbitrator in view of the arbitration agreement. It is demonstrated before us that a Commercial Civil Suit No. 130 of 2022 was filed by the petitioner seeking recovery of certain amount from the respondent, wherein Respondent No.1 filed an application under Section 8 stating that the suit was liable to be rejected in view of the arbitration clause between the parties. The application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act' 1996 filed by the Respondent has been allowed by the judgment and order dated 17.01.2024.

5. While dismissing the suit, the Civil Court has opined that the parties shall make an endevour for appointment of arbitrator in accordance of the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act' 1996. The petitioner, thereafter, sent a notice invoking arbitration clause on 08.05.2024, which has not been responded.

6. No one has put an appearance on behalf of the respondents in the present petition as well. It is evident that the respondents are deliberately avoiding the notice and are delaying adjudication of the dispute. I, therefore, allow the present petition.

7. Hence, I pass the following:-

ORDER
(i) Petition is allowed.
(ii) Dr. Jyotsnaben Yagnik, Retd. District Judge, having address at: B.No.9, Satyam Judges Bunglow, B/h Vrindavan Heights, Opp. Dev Aurum Flats, Vande Mataram, Gota Road, Ahmedabad - 382470 and having contact Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by MR. SAHIL SAMIULLA RANGER(HC01898) on Tue Jan 21 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 00:05:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/ARBI.P/135/2024 ORDER DATED: 10/01/2025 undefined number 9227677460 and Email ID: [email protected] is hereby appointed as the sole Arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties in accordance with the Arbitration Centre (Domestic and International), High Court of Gujarat Rules, 2021. Both Parties would also be governed by said Rules.
(iii) Registry to communicate this order to the sole Arbitrator forthwith by Speed Post.
(iv) Pending application/s, if any, stands consigned to records.

(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ ) SAHIL S. RANGER Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by MR. SAHIL SAMIULLA RANGER(HC01898) on Tue Jan 21 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 00:05:30 IST 2025