Arbitration Appeal No v. Railway Contractor
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Arbitration Appeal No. \cl^ /2009 SM|©-ggl : APPELLANT //PLAtNTIfF^,...- ^ t ^S^€r^^" .^'L&l^ ^^y^^- ^ VERSUS ^.^•^ 'r^T".^'" ^6.D. Construction Railway Contractor, House'No.11/602, PanditDeendayalUpadhyay Nagar, Gudhiyari, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) - • NON-APPLICANT /^ESPONDENT ^Union of India, Through : The Divisional Engineer, South East Central Railway, Raipur (C.G.) APPEAL UNDER SECTION 37 OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR Arbitration Appeal No.12 oF 2009 APPELLANT/: (Plaintiff) NON-APPLICANT/: (Respondent:) D.D. Construction Versus Unionoflndia {Appeal under Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996} Present: None present For the appellant. Mr. Ayaz Naved, counsel For the respbndent. Sinale Bench: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma. J ORDER (6-8-2013)
When the yesterday's passed over matfcer is called for hearing, none present For the appellanL No representation is made.
By this appeal, the appellant has challenged the order dated 31-12-2008 passed by the Disfcrict: Judge, Raipur in Civil Appeal No.l-A/2008. In absence of any representation on behalF of the appellant, no option except
to dismiss the appeal is left.
Th^appealisdismissed ForwanfcoFprosecution. No order as to costs. Soma Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge
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.