Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Haryana Urban Development Authority ... vs M/S. Mehta Construction Company on 19 February, 2021

Bench: Indu Malhotra, Ajay Rastogi

     ITEM NO.5                    Court 12 (Video Conferencing)                     SECTION IV-B

                                   S U P R E M E C O U R T O F             I N D I A
                                           RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 23287/2020

     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 11-12-2019
     in FAO No. 2340/2019 (O&M) passed by the High Court Of Punjab &
     Haryana At Chandigarh)

     HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, KARNAL                               Petitioner(s)

                                                          VERSUS

     M/S. MEHTA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY & ANR.                                     Respondent(s)

     (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.113354/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY
     IN FILING )

     Date : 19-02-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :                HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA
                            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI

     For Petitioner(s)                   Mr. Vikrant, Adv.
                                         Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR
                                         Mr. Prateek Rai, Adv.
     For Respondent(s)

                              UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                                 O R D E R

The counsel for the petitioner submits that the objections were filed within the extended time limit prescribed by Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘the Act’) and were within the period of limitation. The Additional District Judge dismissed the objections on merits, and also held that the objections were barred by limitation. An appeal was filed under Section 37 of the Act. The High Court merely recorded the findings of the Additional District Judge, and held that the counsel had failed to point out any perversity in the findings of Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by JAGDISH KUMAR Date: 2021.02.22 the Court below, and failed to point out how the objections were 15:51:59 IST Reason: filed within the period of limitation.

...2/-

In view of the Judgment passed by this Court in Chintels India Ltd. v. Bhayana Builders Pvt. Ltd. in Civil Appeal No. 4028 of 2020 on 11.02.2021, we issue notice on the Special Leave Petition, as well as on the application for condonation of delay in filing the Special Leave Petition, returnable on 05.03.2021. Dasti, in addition, is permitted.

In the meanwhile, there shall be stay of operation of the impugned judgment and final order dated 11.12.2019 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in FAO No. 2340 of 2019 (O&M).

(NIRMALA NEGI)                                 (BEENA JOLLY)
COURT MASTER (SH)                            COURT MASTER (NSH)