Writ Petition No. 21371 of 2010 · Andhra Pradesh High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- V ESWARAIAH, NOUSHAD ALI
Provisions considered
Judgment
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION NO.21371 OF 2010 B e t w e e n:
1. Beereddy Sunitha Reddy.
2. Beereddy George Reddy. - - - Petitioners. A n d
M/s. Reliance Capital Limited, A Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and having its registered Office at I Floor, H.Block, Dhirubhai Ambani Knowledge City, Koparkhairane, Navi Mumbai and its Corporate & Head Consumer Finance Division Office and Corporate Office at 570, Rectifier House, Naigaon X Road, Wadala, Mumbai – 400 031.
The Sole Arbhitrator (B.A. Shelar), Advocate, High Court Office at 105-B Wing, First Floor, Ramji House, Jambulwadi, Dhobi Talao, Mumbai – 400 002. - - - Respondents. Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ or order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the award dated 14- 06-2010 on the file of the Sole Arbitrator (B.A. Shelar) Advocate, Arbitration proceedings NO.73/2010 as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the Award. Counsel for the Petitioners Kumar. : M/S.l.Reddy Krishna Counsel for the Respondents : The court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH & THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION NO.21371 OF 2010
O R D E R : (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V. Eswaraiah) This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioners questioning the Award dated 14-06-2010, passed by the second Respondent Arbitrator, under the Arbitration proceedings No.73 of 2010 as illegal, arbitrary and to set aside the same. We are of the opinion that, against passing of the Award by the Arbitrator, the only remedy left open for the petitioners is to question the same under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Therefore, the Writ Petition is not maintainable and accordingly the same is dismissed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to avail the remedy provided under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. No order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. ________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. August 30, 2010. Dsh.
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.