Mangla Advisory Pvt. Ltd. vs Cybizcall (International) & Anr.
2009 Latest Caselaw 3469 Del

*           IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


                                                     Date of Reserve: August 07, 2009
                                                        Date of Order: August 31, 2009
+Arb. P.135/2006
%                                                                              31.08.2009
     Mangla Advisory Pvt. Ltd.                                                 ...Petitioner
     Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Advocate

       Versus

       Cybizcall (International) & Anr.                                       ...Respondent
       Through: Mr. Sanjeev Narula, Advocate

       JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA

1.     Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2.     To be referred to the reporter or not?

3.     Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?


       JUDGMENT

1. This petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996

has been preferred by the petitioner.

2. I have dismissed another petition under Section 11 of the petitioner for

appointment of an arbitrator. This petition is maintainable only if the disputes

between the parties are referable to an arbitrator. Since the disputes itself

are not referable to the arbitrator and this Court has refused to appoint an

arbitrator, this petition/ application under Section 9 is not maintainable and is

hereby dismissed. No orders as to costs.

August 31, 2009                                          SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA J.
rd




Arb.P. 135/2006   Mangla Advisory P. Lt. v.Cybizcall (International) & Anr.    Page 1 Of 1