Delhi High Court - Orders
M/S Gtl Infrastructure Ltd vs Sh. Vijay Kohli on 4 October, 2023
Author: Anup Jairam Bhambhani
Bench: Anup Jairam Bhambhani
$~49
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ FAO 254/2023
M/S GTL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Swetank Shantanu, Advocate.
versus
SH. VIJAY KOHLI ..... Respondent
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
ORDER
% 04.10.2023 CM APPL. 51000/2023 (Exemption) Exemption granted, subject to just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.
CM APPL. 50999/2023 (delay in filing) & CM APPL. 51002/2023 (delay in re-filing) By way of the present applications filed under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, the applicant/appellant seeks condonation of 23 days' delay in filing the appeal; and condonation of 210 days' delay in re-filing the appeal.
2. For the reasons stated in the applications, which are duly supported by affidavits, the delay in filing and re-filing is condoned.
3. The appeal is taken on Board.
4. Applications stand disposed-of.
This is a digitally signed order. FAO 254/2023 Page 1 of 3The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/10/2023 at 22:14:56 FAO 254/2023 & CM APPL. 51001/2023
5. By way of the present appeal filed under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('A&C Act') read with section 104 read with Order XLIII (IR) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the appellant impugns order dated 17.10.2022 made by the learned Trial Court dismissing their application under section 8 of the A&C Act essentially on the basis that the maximum permissible time for filing of the written statement had already run-out; and since the application under section 8 of the A&C Act was filed thereafter, it deserved to be dismissed. In doing so, the learned Trial Court proceeds on the basis of the decision of a Division Bench of this court in SPML Infra Ltd. vs. Trisquare Switchgears Pvt. Ltd. 1
6. Mr. Swetank Shantanu, learned counsel appearing for the appellant however points-out that in the said decision, the Division Bench has upheld the decision of a commercial court in a commercial suit, to say that an application under section 8 of the A&C Act would not lie after the right of a party to file written statement has been closed. It is pointed-out however, that a perusal of the impugned order in the present case would show that in this case, the application under section 8 of A&C Act was filed and 'declined' before the right to file written statement was closed, though by the self-same order.
7. However, other things apart, Mr. Shantanu very fairly informs the court that the suit has since proceeded to the stage of final arguments.
8. Though otherwise, there may have been some point to be considered in the matter, however since the suit has now proceeded to the final 1 2022 SCC OnLine Del 1914 This is a digitally signed order. FAO 254/2023 Page 2 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/10/2023 at 22:14:56 stage and is listed today itself i.e., 04.10.2023 for final arguments, this court considers it futile to now consider the merits or demerits of the impugned order since referring the parties to arbitration under section 8 of the A&C Act would now serve no purpose.
9. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
10. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed-of.
ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J OCTOBER 4, 2023/ak This is a digitally signed order. FAO 254/2023 Page 3 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/10/2023 at 22:14:57