Prakash Singh vs Chief Commercial Manager
2009 Latest Caselaw 2723 Del

*            IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

     +     F.A.O. (OS) NO.298 of 2009 with CM Nos.9795-96/2009

%                                       Date of decision: 20th July, 2009

         PRAKASH SINGH                                  ..... Appellant
                           Through: Mr. Naveen R. Nath, Advocate.

                                  versus

         CHIEF COMMERCIAL MANAGER                   ..... Respondent
                        Through: Mr. Neeraj Atri and Ms. Vineeta
                                 Atri, Advocates.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKUL MUDGAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NEERAJ KISHAN KAUL

1.       Whether Reporters of the local newspapers may be allowed to
         see the judgment?                                       [NO]
2.       Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not?          [NO]
3.       Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? [NO]

                           J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

MUKUL MUDGAL, J.

1. Notice.

2. Mr. Atri, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the

respondent.

3. With the consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for final

hearing.

4. This appeal challenges the impugned order dated 12th May,

2009 of the learned Single Judge dismissing the OMP preferred by

the appellant under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,

1996 praying for staying of the order dated 22nd February, 2009 of

the respondent. We see no reason to interfere with the learned Single

Judge's order dated 12th May, 2009 to the extent it holds that a court

cannot restore a contract which has already been terminated. Indeed

the appellant's counsel did not seriously challenge this finding. The

learned counsel for the appellant stressed on the fact that the order

of black listing is also subsisting against the appellant and was

passed contrary to the principles of natural justice. In our view, the

last paragraph of the learned Single Judge's order dated 12th May,

2009 protects the appellant's rights which reads as follows:-

" It is made clear that this order would not come in the way of petitioner as and when petitioner challenges the order of blacklisting."

5. Considering the fact that sufficient protection against the

blacklisting had already been granted to the appellant and since

learned counsel for the appellant wishes to withdraw the present

appeal with liberty to file such an application raising pleas against

his blacklisting, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn with the

aforesaid liberty. Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

CM Nos.9795-96/2009 in F.A.O. (OS) NO.298 of 2009

6. Since the appeal has been dismissed as withdrawn, these

applications have become infructuous and the same stand disposed

of as having become infructuous.

MUKUL MUDGAL [JUDGE]

NEERAJ KISHAN KAUL [JUDGE] JULY 20, 2009 sb