Uttarakhand High Court
M/S Aska Equipments Ltd. ...... ... vs The Gujarat State Disaster on 17 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
MODIFICATION APPLICATION MCC NO. 04 OF 2023
IN
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 250 OF 2021
17th OCTOBER, 2023
M/s Aska Equipments Ltd. ...... Appellant / Review Applicant
Versus
The Gujarat State Disaster
Management Authority ....... Respondent
Counsel for the appellant : Mr. Siddhartha Sah and Mr. Jitendra
Chaudhary, learned counsels
Counsel for the review applicant : Mr. Ramji Srivastava and Mr. Sagar
Kothari, learned counsels for
respondent
The Court made the following:
ORDER: (per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Vipin Sanghi)
This modification application, being MCC No. 04 of
2023, has been moved by the respondent to seek modification
of the judgment dated 10.01.2023, whereby the present
appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
was disposed of.
2) The judgment dated 10.01.2023, in so far as it is
relevant, reads as follows :
2
"Counsel for the appellant has taken instructions. He
states that the appellant is ready and willing to accept the
impugned order passed by the Commercial Court, under
Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996,
setting aside the award and to re-initiate arbitration, so that a
fresh award is rendered after hearing all the parties.
2. We, accordingly, dispose of this Appeal as
withdrawn. The matter is remanded back to the Arbitral
Tribunal to render a fresh award, after hearing the parties on
the basis of the record already available. The Arbitral Tribunal
shall hear the parties, and pass a reasoned award."
3) The case of the applicant / respondent in the appeal,
is that after the passing of the judgment dated 10.01.2023,
the respondent approached the Tribunal on 17.06.2023,
stating that they had not filed their affidavit in reply, or
documents, to show the correct facts in the case and,
accordingly, they may be permitted to file a detailed affidavit
in reply. The applicant has also placed on record the order
passed by the Tribunal on 17.06.2023, recording that it was
made clear to the parties that whatever the claim case file is
available shall be admitted as arbitration claim. It records that
the respondent, i.e., the applicant herein, has submitted the
reply on petition on 04.03.2016, and that has been admitted
as a reply of the same, and the claimant had filed rejoinder to
this reply.
4) The submission of Mr. Srivastava is that what has
been taken as the applicant's reply in the petition dated
04.03.2016, is only an administrative communication, and it
3
does not meet the claim petition made by the non-applicant /
appellant.
5) We are not inclined to modify our judgment, as
prayed for, for the reason that the said judgment was passed
after hearing counsels in open Court, and we made it clear,
while remanding the matter back to the Arbitral Tribunal - "to
render a fresh award, after hearing the parties on the basis of
the record already available." In our view, it is too late in the
day, at this stage, for the applicant / respondent to now seek
modification of the judgment dated 10.01.2023.
6) The modification application is, accordingly,
dismissed.
7) The recall application, being MCC No. 05 of 2023,
moved by the applicant / appellant, for recalling the order
dated 18.08.2023, passed by the Court, wherein time has been
sought to file response to the modification application filed by
the respondent, and for taking the accompanying counter-
affidavit of the appellant against said modification application
on record, after condoning the delay in filing the same, also
stands dismissed, as infructuous.
_________________
VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.
__________________
MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.
Dt: 17th OCTOBER, 2023
Negi
