I N THE HI GH COURT OF JUDI CATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The application is disposed of
Judgment
’HON BLE MR.JUSTICE PREM SHANKER ASOPA Mr.Parag Rastogi, for the applicant Mr.G.N.Mishra Manav, Addl. GC Heard learned counsel for the parties. Counsel for the applicant submits that in this case, the name of the Sole Arbitrator was wrongly recorded as Mr.R.N.Purohit, Chief Engineer (Retd.),Public Works Department whereas in fact, his name is Mr.R.L.Purohit. In Para 7 of the application, the Applicant has suggested some more names of Chief Engineer / Superintending Engineer, in reply to which counsel for the non applicant submits that earlier, the arbitration proceedings were going on before Mr. N.P.Mathur, who was the retired Chief Engineer and after his demise, the matter was referred to Mr.R.L.Purohit, Retd. Chief Engineer (wrongly recorded as Mr.R.N. Purohit). Having considered the aforesaid submissions, I deem it proper to correct the name of Mr.R.N.Purohit with Mr.R.L.Purohit. The order dated
23.12.2010 is modified as under: “In this case, a letter dated 27.10.2010 along with the record of the arbitration proceedings has been received from Mr.Vinay Prakash Mathur stating therein that his father Shri Narain Prakash Mathur, Retired Chief Engineer, P.W.D. who was appointed as the Sole Arbitrator in the matter, by this Court vide order dated 8.2.2008, expired on 14.9.2010. In view of the aforesaid fact that the Sole Arbitrator expired on
14.9.2010, the Sole Arbitrator is be substituted. Counsel for both the parties have agreed for substitution of the name of Mr.Narain Prakash Mathur, Retired Chief Engineer, P.W.D. (since deceased) with Mr.R.L.Purohit, Chief Engineer (Retd.), P.W.D. as the Sole Arbitrator in the present arbitration proceedings. 2 I, therefore, substitute Mr.R.L.Purohit, Chief Engineer (Retd.), P.W.D. as the Sole Arbitrator, and the matter is referred to him for resolving the disputes between the parties. The Sole Arbitrator will fix his fee according to the Arbitration Manual. All objections would be open to be raised by the respondent before the Sole Arbitrator. The substituted Arbitrator is directed to proceed from the stage where the arbitration proceedings were left incomplete by late Mr.N.P.Mathur. Both the parties are directed to appear before the Sole Arbitrator on
Operative part
31.5.2011. A copy of this order along with the record of the arbitration proceedings be sent to Mr.R.L.Purohit, Chief Engineer (Retd.), P.W.D. 32, Vishveshwariya Nagar Extension, Gopalpura Bye Pass, Jaipur.” The application is disposed of. ( Prem Shanker Asopa) J. गोpa ल
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The application is disposed of
Which court decided this case, and when?
Rajasthan High Court, on 21 Apr 2011. The bench was PREM SHANKER ASOPA.
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.