Jayarambanan v. Sagar Ratna Restaurants Pvt Ltd

Delhi High Court · 05 Feb 2016 · 2016:DHC:8561-DB
Pradeep Nandrajog; Mukta Gupta
FAO(OS)333/2015
2016:DHC:8561-DB
civil appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed appeals challenging interim orders as withdrawn, emphasizing that substantive disputes pending before an Arbitrator should be resolved through arbitration with liberty to modify interim relief.

Full Text
Translation output
9' HIGH COURT OF DELHI
FAO(OS)333/2015
JAYARAMBANAN Appellant Represented by: Mr.Anil K.Khaware,Advocate with
Mr.Pramod Pandey,Advocate
VERSUS
SAGAR RATNA RESTAURANTS PVTLTD & ORS Respondents
Represented by: None
FAO(OS)337/2015
JAYARAM BANAN Appellant Represented by: MrAnil K.Khaware,Advocate with
VERSUS
SAGAR RATNA RESTAURANTS PVTLTD & ORS Respondents
FAO(OS)339/2015
JAYRAM BANAN Appellant Represented by: Mr.AnilK.Khaware,Advocate with
VERSUS
PANDEREQUITY HOLDINGS LTD&ORS .....Respondents
FAO(OS)No.333/2015 tSc Conn.Matters page 1 of3
2016:DHC:8561-DB V
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
05.02.2016 CM No.l1487/2015 in FAQ fOS)No.333/2015
CM No.11527/2015 in FAQ TOSl No.337/2015 CMNo.ll571/2015m.FAO(OSlNo.339/2015
ORDER

1. For the reasons stated in the applications delay in filing the appeals is condoned.

2. The applications are disposed of. FAG rOS)No.333/2015 & CM No.l1488/2015 FAQ rOSlNo.337/2015 & CM No.l1528/2015 FAQ(081 No.339/2015 & CM No.l1572/2015

1. Learned counsel for the appellant states that he has been instructed by the appellant to withdraw the appeals and the applications for the reason learned Arbitrator is seized ofthe substantive issues and the appellants are not desirous of questioning the interim measure directed by the learned Single Judge for the reason ultimately rights and liabilities of the parties would be decided as per the award.

2. Impugned order is an interim measure till the award is pronoucned.

3. We note that the learned Single Judge, vide paragraph 30 of the impugned order has observed that parties would be at liberty to seek variation or modification of the order dated March 13,2015 before the FAO(OS)No.333/2015& Conn.Matters page2of[3] learned Arbitrator.

4. The appeals and the applications are dismissed as not pressed.

5. No costs. PRADEE^NA^LltAJOG,J. FEBRUARY 05,2016 mamta MUKTA GUPTA,J. FAO(OS)No.333/2015& Conn. Matters page3of[3]