Gujarat High Court
Gokulbhai M Dhabhi vs Hemchandracharya North Gujarat ... on 10 May, 2018
Author: A.J. Shastri
Bench: A.J. Shastri
C/CRA/3/2018 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 3 of 2018
With
R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 4 of 2018
With
R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 5 of 2018
With
R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 6 of 2018
With
R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 7 of 2018
==========================================================
GOKULBHAI M DHABHI
Versus
HEMCHANDRACHARYA NORTH GUJARAT UNIVERSITY
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VISHAL C MEHTA(6152) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
SAMEE A URAIZEE(7747) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MR SIDDHARTH H DAVE(5306) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED(4) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J. SHASTRI
Date : 10/05/2018
ORAL ORDER
1. The present group of Revision Applications is filed challenging the judgment and order passed by the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal at Ahmedabad (herein after referred to as "the Tribunal" for short) in CA No.9 of 2017 in Arbitration Reference No.8 of 2017, CA No.4 of 2017 in Arbitration Reference No.8 of 2017, CA No.5 of 2017 in Arbitration Reference No.9 of 2017, CA No.6 of 2017 in Arbitration Reference No.10 of 2017 and CA No.7 of 2017 in Arbitration Reference No.11 of 2017. By way of impugned orders, the Tribunal rejected the aforesaid Civil Applications for interim reliefs on the short ground Page 1 of 3 C/CRA/3/2018 ORDER that it has no power to grant interim injunction or to pass any interim order. The Tribunal did not adjudicate the prayers made in the aforesaid Civil Applications filed by the respective petitioners on merits.
2. During the course of hearing and upon the broad consensus of the parties and also considering various provisions of the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 1992 read with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, it transpires that the Tribunal does have the power to pass interim award / order / injunction as accepted byboth learned advocates appearing for parties. However, without further deliberating on the said aspect, when both the sides have requested this Court to remand the matters to the Tribunal for decisions on the application on merits, this Court deems it fit to dispose off the present Revision Application by passing the following order:
2.1 The impugned judgments and orders passed by the Tribunal as referred to hereinabove are quashed and set aside and the Civil Applications are remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decisions on merits of the case of the rival parties;
2.2 The Tribunal, upon remand, shall decide all the aforesaid Civil Applications afresh on merits after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties on or before date 25/06/2018;
2.3 It is clarified that this court has not gone into merits of the dispute between the parties and all the contentions, on law and facts, available to the respective parties are kept open and the civil Page 2 of 3 C/CRA/3/2018 ORDER applications shall be decided independently and without being influenced by the present order or impugned order;
2.4 The interim reliefs earlier granted in the present Revision Applications are vacated, however, the grant or vacating of the interim relief by this Court shall not come in the way of the Tribunal to decide the Civil Applications on their own merits.
3. It is clarified and observed that if any construction is put up by the Respondents pending the proceedings before the Tribunal, the same shall be subject to the final outcome of the proceedings before the Tribunal or any order passed by the Tribunal and the Respondents shall not claim any equity in that regard.
4. With the above observations and directions, the present Revision Applications are disposed of with no order as to costs.
(A.J. SHASTRI, J) MISHRA AMIT V. Page 3 of 3