Telangana High Court
M/S.Radha Madhav Engineering ... vs M/S Rashtriya Ispat Nigam ... on 11 June, 2018
Author: V.Ramasubramanian
Bench: V Ramasubramanian
* HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.BALAYOGI
+ Civil Revision Petition No.1657 of 2018
% 11-6-2018
# M/s Radha Madhav Engineering Enterprises,
Door No.5-28/1, Near E-Seva, Chinagantyada,
Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam District,
Rep. by its Managing Partner, V.T. Bhaskar Rao
... Appellant/Respondent No.1
Vs.
$ 1. M/s Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd.,
Visakhapatnam Steel Plant,
Having its Admn've Bldg at Ukkunagaram,
Visakhapatnam-530 031,
Rep. by its Deputy General Manager (Projects),
Visakhapatnam
... Respondent/Petitioner
2. Sri Y.K. Rao, Flat No.402, Ayodhya Apartments,
Kirlampudi Layout, Visakhapatnam-530 017
3. Sri V.S. Rao, D.No.49-54-6/1, Balaji Hills,
Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam-530 013
4. Sri R.Nagabhushana Rao, Flat No.262,
Swarna Jayanti Towers, Balayyasastry Layout,
Visakhapatnam-530 013
(Respondents 2 to 4 pro forma respondents)
... Respondents/Respondents
! Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. P.V. Krishnaiah
Counsel for Respondent No.1: Mr. V.Ravinder Rao,
Senior Counsel, representing
Mr. A.Krishnam Raju
< Gist:
> Head Note:
? Cases referred:
Nil.
2
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.BALAYOGI
Civil Revision Petition No.1657 of 2018
Order: (per V.Ramasubramanian, J.)
This is an application filed by the award-holder seeking
a limited relief to direct the Principal District Court,
Visakhapatnam, to dispose of I.A.No.629 of 2017 filed in
a pending application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996.
2. Heard Mr. P.V. Krishnaiah, learned counsel for the
petitioner. Mr. A.Krishnam Raju, learned counsel, takes
notice for the 1st respondent/award-debtor and he is
represented by Mr. V.Ravinder Rao, learned Senior Counsel
appearing for him.
3. The dispute between the petitioner and the
1st respondent was referred to an Arbitral Tribunal
comprising of 3 members who are the respondents 2 to 4
herein. They passed an award on 15-12-2016.
4. Challenging the award, the 1st respondent filed
O.P.No.306 of 2017 under Section 34. Immediately upon
receipt of notice in the petition under Section 34, the
petitioner/award-holder filed an application in I.A.No.629 of
2017 seeking the dismissal of the O.P. on the ground that the
O.P. was filed without complying with the pre-condition
prescribed under Section 19 of the Micro, Small and Medium
Enterprises Development Act, 2006. In this application, the
3
1st respondent sought time to file counter and hence the
application has been adjourned from time to time for the past
nearly a year. Hence, the award-holder has come up with the
above revision seeking a direction to the Trial Court to
dispose of I.A.No.629 of 2017.
5. In the light of the limited nature of the prayer made
by the petitioner, without expressing any opinion on the
merits, the civil revision petition is disposed of directing the
Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam, to dispose of
I.A.No.629 of 2017 in A.O.P.No.306 of 2017 after giving
opportunities to both sides, within a period of 4 (four) weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this revision
shall stand closed. No costs.
___________________________
V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J.
________________ N.BALAYOGI, J. 11th June, 2018. Ak 4 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.BALAYOGI Civil Revision Petition No.1657 of 2018 (per VRS, J.) 11th June, 2018.
(Ak)