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 0, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Satyanarayan Gupta vs Kirti Chand Dadda And Anr on 19 May, 2017

Author: Mohammad Rafiq

Bench: Mohammad Rafiq

 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
                      JAIPUR


             S. B. Arbitration Application No. 61 / 2014
Satyanarayan Gupta son of Shri Radheyshyam Gupta, aged about
45 Years by caste Mahajan, resident of Plot No. 1E19 Shivshakti
Colony, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur.
                                                       ----Applicant


                               Versus


1. Kirtichand Dadda son of Late Shri Deepchandji Dadda, resident
of Plot No.41-42, Surendra Pal Colony, Shyam Nagar, Jaipur.

2. Prakashchand Dadda son of Late Shri Deepchandji Dadda,
resident of Plot No.4, Deepshikha, Narayan Singh Road, Trimurti
Chauraha, Jaipur.
                                                   ----Respondents

_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Taneja. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amrit Surollia and Mr. Aditya Surollia. _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Order 19/05/2017 This application has been filed by the applicant seeking appointment of independent Arbitrator to resolve his disputes with the non-applicants.

Learned counsel for the non-applicants at the outset submitted that in view of the judgments of this court in Trade Swift Developers Private Limited Vs. Gopal Prasad Kanoria and others (S.B. Arbitration Application No.30/2014) and Ansal (2 of 2) [ARBAP-61/2014] Properties and Infrastructure Limited Vs. Smt. Jhamru & Others(S.B. Arbitration Application No. 54/2015) decided on 21/10/2016, present application is not maintainable, as the agreement in the present case is not sufficiently stamped.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in these circumstances, liberty may be granted to the applicant to file fresh arbitration application after getting the agreement sufficiently stamped.

In view of above, the application is dismissed as not maintainable in view of the judgments of this court in Trade Swift Developers Private Limited(supra) and Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Limited(supra), however, with liberty to the applicant to file fresh arbitration application after getting the agreement sufficiently stamped.

(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ) J.

Manoj