Mr. Rakesh Nair P vs M/S.Colossal Projects Private ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 17389 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 3RD BHADRA, 1943
                          AR NO. 16 OF 2015
PETITIONERS:

    1          RAKESH NAIR.P
               S/O.P.P.NAIR, 7A/CROWN, TRINITY APARTMENTS,
               OPPOSITE LULU EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM - 682 024.

    2          SUBHA THEKEDTH
               W/O.RAKESH NAIR, DO-DO

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE
               SRI.SAJIN JOSEPH

RESPONDENTS:

    1          M/S.COLOSSAL PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,
               6, COMMUNITY CENTRE, SAKET, NEW DELHI-110 017,
               REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

    2          M/S.UNITECH LIMITED, 6,
               COMMUNITY CENTRE, SAKET, NEW DELHI-110 017,
               REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

               BY ADV SRI.T.R.ASWAS


        THIS     ARBITRATION   REQUEST        HAVING     COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION       ON   25.08.2021,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 AR No.16 of 2015
                                2

                       JUDGMENT

This matter was heard by me on 13.08.2021 and a

judgment was delivered under the impression that nothing

survives in this Arbitration Request.

2. However, Sri.Blaze K.Jose, learned counsel

appearing for the petitioners, thereafter made a submission

that the claim of his clients is still subsisting and therefore,

that the relief sought for in this Arbitration Request requires to

be considered on its merits.

3. It is in such circumstances that the matter has been

listed today.

4. Sri.T.R.Awaz, learned counsel appearing for the

respondents, brought to my notice that various issues relating

to the 2nd respondent Company is now pending before the

Hon'ble Supreme Court and that its Board of Directors have

been superseded on orders of the Hon'ble Court and replaced

by a new one. He added that efforts are now being taken

under the aegis of the Hon'ble Supreme Court to resolve all the

disputes between the various claimants against the company

and that the petitioners are also among them. He thus, AR No.16 of 2015

submitted that if the petitioners require any further relief, they

will have to move the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

5. On hearing Sri.T.R.Awaz as afore, I asked

Sri.Blaze K.Jose as to what purpose would be served if this

Court now appoints an Arbitrator, since the company is not

represented by its earlier Board of Directors, but by one which

is appointed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Sri.Blaze K.Jose

responded that, in such circumstances, his clients will approach

the Hon'ble Supreme Court seeking necessary orders.

Taking note of the afore submissions, I close this

Arbitration Request, granting full liberty to the petitioners to

invoke and pursue all their remedies before the Hon'ble

Supreme Court; and if it becomes warranted even thereafter, I

grant them full liberty to a seek rehearing of this Arbitration

Request.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE

ww AR No.16 of 2015

APPENDIX OF AR 16/2015

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT FOR SALE DATED 27.08.2010.

ANNEXURE 2 A TRUE COPY OF THE MOU DATED 27.8.2010.

ANNEXURE 3(A) A TRUE COPY OF EMAIL FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT DATED 10/10/2013.

ANNEXURE 3(B) A TRUE COPY OF EMAIL DATED 13/12/2013.

ANNEXURE 3(C) A TRUE COPY OF EMAIL DATED 24/2/2014.

ANNEXURE 3(D) A TRUE COPY OF EMAIL DATED 24/6/2014.

ANNEXURE 3(E) A TRUE COPY OF EMAIL FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT DATED 19/8/2014.

ANNEXURE 4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.1.2015 OF OP (ARBITRATION) NO. 1038/2014.

ANNEXURE 5 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16.01.2015 SENT ON 20.1.2015.

ANNEXURE 6 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE DATED 2/3/2015.