Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Gupta Bros India vs The Press Trust Of India Limited on 15 September, 2022

Author: Prateek Jalan

Bench: Prateek Jalan

                          $~25
                          *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +    O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 92/2022
                               GUPTA BROS INDIA                                ..... Petitioner
                                              Through: Mr. S.K. Maniktala, Mr. Jatin
                                                          Kumar, Mr. Mohit Kumar, Mr.
                                                          Udit Maniktala, Mr. Samaksh
                                                          Sharma, Advocates.
                                                      versus
                               THE PRESS TRUST OF INDIA LIMITED             ..... Respondent
                                              Through: Mr. Anurag Ranjan and Ms Seema
                                                          Neb, Advocates (Enrolment No.
                                                          D/1785/1999,     Mobile           No.
                                                          9818060838).

                          CORAM:
                          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
                                                  ORDER

% 15.09.2022 I.A. 15081/2022 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. This application stands disposed of.

O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 92/2022

1. Issue Notice. Mr. Anurag Ranjan, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. Reply to the petition may be filed within two weeks. Rejoinder thereto, if any, may be filed within one week thereafter.

2. The issue raised in this petition under Sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is as to whether ongoing arbitral proceedings can continue before an arbitrator who was unilaterally appointed by the authorities of the respondent.

3. In the facts and circumstances of this case, learned counsel for the parties join issue as to the effect the judgment of the Supreme Court in Signature Not Verified Digitally signed O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 92/2022 Page 1 of 2 By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:16.09.2022 11:34:20 Perkins Eastman Architects DPC vs. HSCC (India) Ltd (2020) 20 SCC 760, and other judgments following it. My attention has been drawn to an order dated 11.01.2021 passed by the Supreme Court in S.L.P.(C) No. 12670/2020 [Union of India vs. M/s Tantia Constructions Limited], whereby a three-Judge Bench has expressed a prima facie difference with the view taken by another three-Judge Bench in Central Organisation for Railway Electrification vs. M/S ECI-SPIC-SMO-MCML (JV) A Joint venture company (2020) 14 SCC 712.

4. Learned counsel for both the parties may file their written submissions, alongwith copies of any authorities upon which they wish to rely within the same time.

5. List on 23.11.2022.

6. I am informed that the arbitral proceedings are at the stage of final arguments, and there are some applications pending before her. The learned Arbitrator may hear the arguments, but is requested to defer the publishing of the award until the next date of hearing before this Court.

7. It is made clear that the participation of the parties before the learned Arbitrator will be without prejudice to their rights and contentions in this petition.

PRATEEK JALAN, J SEPTEMBER 15, 2022 'vp'/ Click here to check corrigendum, if any Signature Not Verified Digitally signed O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 92/2022 Page 2 of 2 By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:16.09.2022 11:34:20