Bombay High Court
ARBP/48/1997 of GAYAPRASAD J. PANDE Vs M/S. RAMDULAR BAIJNATH on 10 November 1997
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1581 OF 1998
IN
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.48 OF 1997
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.48 OF 1997
Gayaprasad J. Pande.vs.
M/s.Ramdular Baijanath.
---
Mr.N.S.Jain i/b. S.K.Jain, for Petitioner.
Mr.K.R.Dhanuka, for Respondents.
... Petitioner
.... Respondents.
P.C.:-
CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH,J.
DATED: 6[th] September,2005
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. By consent of parties the Award dated 9.11.1994 passed inArbitration Case no.L/46/94/95 is set aside.
2. By consent of parties Shri.M.U.Pandey, Advocate, havingaddress at 5, Gopal Bhuvan, S.V.Road, Malad (West), Mumbai- 400064, is appointed as Arbitrator and the disputes between the parties arereferred for decision to the learned Arbitrator. The learned Arbitratorshall decide the dispute in accordance with the provisions of theIndian Arbitration Act,1940.
3. By consent of parties, the petitioner Gayaprasad J. Pandeyis permitted to withdraw the amount which is deposited by theRespondents M/s.Ramdular Baijnath in the Court together with theaccruals, if any, subject to the condition that he furnishes anundertaking to this Court undertaking to re-deposit the amount if sodirected by either the learned Arbitrator or by this Court and on suchterms and conditions including the rate of interest as may be directed.
4. In case, the petitioner Gayaprasad J. Pande fails towithdraw the amount as directed above within a period of Eight weeksfrom today, the amount be continued in deposit subject to thedirections that may be given by the learned Arbitrator in the Award.
The Arbitration Petition and the chamber summons aredisposed of.
The office is directed to hand over the record and papersin sealed cover to the Petitioner Gayaprasad J. Pande for handing itover to the new arbitrator. It goes without saying that as the Awardpursuant to which the decree has been passed by this Court, is setaside today, the decree ceases to exist.