✦ Patna High Court

Laxmi Devi v. The Union of India

CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No. 10395 of 2020CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH, MADHURESH PRASAD

Case at a glance

Outcome

Allowed

application is allowed

Key paragraphs

  • Para 44. Manish Kumar S/o Vijay Kumar Singh R/o House No. 25, Road No. 10, East Patel Nagar, P.s.- Shastri Nagar, District- Patna ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s For the Respondent/s Mr Shashi Bhushan Kumar, Advocate Dr K N Singh, ASG Mr…

Judgment

2.

The Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi The Securities and Exchange Board of India India

3.

M/s Bonanza Partfolio Limited, Registered Office at 4355/4-C, Madan Mohan Street, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi

Operative part

4.

Manish Kumar S/o Vijay Kumar Singh R/o House No. 25, Road No. 10, East Patel Nagar, P.s.- Shastri Nagar, District- Patna ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s For the Respondent/s Mr Shashi Bhushan Kumar, Advocate Dr K N Singh, ASG Mr Anshuman Singh, CGC : : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH) 5 28-02-2022 Re: Interlocutory Application No 1 of 2022 During the pendency of the main application, the petitioner has died consequent upon which this application has been filed seeking substitution of Laxmi Devi, the widow of the deceased petitioner as his legal representative, in place of the deceased petitioner. Considering the facts and circumstances, this application is allowed. Let the name of the original petitioner be struck off

Patna High Court CWJC No.10395 of 2020(5) dt.28-02-2022 from the cause title and be substituted with the name of his widow Laxmi Devi, as described in paragraph 1 of this application. CWJC No 10395 of 2020 The petitioner is seeking quashing of an award passed in an arbitration proceeding, in present writ application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has remedy under the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This writ application, in our opinion, is misconceived and not maintainable. It is, accordingly, dismissed. The petitioner shall, however, be at liberty to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law, before appropriate forum. (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) (Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- U

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: application is allowed

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Constitution of India — art. 226; Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Patna High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No. 10395 of 2020). ← Search more judgments