M/S Mega Infra ... vs City Montessori School, Lko. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 18500 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:47968
 
Court No. - 20
 

 
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3637 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- M/S Mega Infra Developers,Lucknow Thru. Sole Proprietor Shri Rajendra Kumar Verma
 
Respondent :- City Montessori School, Lko. Thru. Its Ceo Shri Roshan Gandhi And Another
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sridhar Awasthi
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Manish Vaish
 

 
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

Heard Mr. Sudeep Seth, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Sridhar Awasthi, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr. Pritish Kumar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S.L. Vaish, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.1 whose power is taken on record.

Opposite party no.2 being merely a proforma in nature, notices are dispensed with.

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging order dated 03.06.2023 passed by sole Arbitrator under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Also under challenge is the order dated 11.07.2023 passed by Commercial Court under Section 37 of the Act in Arbitration Case No.62 of 2023.

It has been submitted that certain directions have been issued by learned Arbitrator by means of impugned order indicating it having been passed as per consent of parties but in fact consent of petitioner was only with regard to other directions passed in the order except for directions issued under Section 17 of the Act. It is also submitted that the impugned portion of the order was not entirely consensual and was appealed against by the petitioner.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of answering opposite party has submitted that since it has been recorded at the very end of the order that it is being passed with consent of parties, it would be deemed that the entire order has been passed with consent of parties. It is further submitted that even otherwise the order-sheet has been signed by the representative without indicating any protest. It is also submitted that the petitioner/ respondent has also not filed any application for clarification by the sole Arbitrator as required by Judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Endowments & Ors versus Vittal Rao & Ors reported in (2005)4 SCC 120.

After arguing the matter at some length, on the aspect of consent, learned counsel for petitioner seeks to withdraw the petition with liberty to file an appropriate application before sole Arbitrator with regard to aforesaid dispute.

In view of aforesaid, petition is dismissed as withdrawn with aforesaid liberty.

In case any such application is preferred, learned Arbitrator may decide it on its own merits without being influenced by impugned order dated 11.07.2023 by the Commercial Court.

Order Date :- 21.7.2023

Subodh/-