Ramgopal Somani v. Rahul Somani

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WP (227) No.443 of 2017

1. Ramgopal Somani, S/o Ganesh Narayan Somani, aged about 56 years, R/o. Tehsil Road Champa, Police Station Champa, Tehsil Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (CG)

2. Varun Somani, S/o Ramgopal Somani, aged about 31 years, R/o. Tehsil Road Champa, Police Station Champa, Tehsil Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (CG)

3. Shanta Somani, W/o Ramgopal Somani, aged about 55 years, R/o. Tehsil Road Champa, Police Station Champa, Tehsil Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (CG) ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. Rahul Somani, S/o Pawan Kumar Somani, aged about 33 years, Resident of Station Road Champa, P.S. & Teh.: Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (CG)

2. Rekha Somani, W/o Pawan Kumar Somani, aged about 57 years, Resident of Station Road Champa, P.S. & Teh.: Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (CG)

3. Piyush Somani, S/o Pawan Kumar Somani, aged about 32 years, Resident of Station Road Champa, P.S. & Teh.: Champa, DistrictJanjgir-Champa (CG) ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Mr.V.R.Rao, Senior Advocate with Mr.Manoj Paranjape, Advocate For Respondents :

Mr.Abhishek Sinha and Mr.Ravindra Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 24/7/2017

1. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners would submit that since the respondents substantive application under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter called as 'Act of 1996') is pending consideration before the learned District Judge, Janjgir-Champa, the District Judge, Janjgir-Champa be directed to consider and decide the said application including the objection, if any raised with regard to jurisdiction of the District Judge to hear the matter expeditiously in view of the Commercial Courts,

Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has no objection in expediting the hearing of the application/objection, if any and submits that the respondents are interested in expediting disposal of the appeal.

3. Be that as it may, the District Judge, Janjgir-Champa is directed to consider and dispose off the application filed by the respondents under Section 34(3) of the Act of 1996/objection with regard to jurisdiction of the District Judge raised by either of the party in view of the Act of 2015 within a period of one month.

4. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition finally stands disposed off. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge B/-