M/S. Perfect Tailoring v. Smt. Shazli Fatima

The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy and The Hon'ble Sri Justice G.Shyam Prasad Civil Revision Petition Nos.3924 & 3926 of 2016 Date: 16.08.2016 Between:

M/s.Perfect Tailoring Proprietor Mrs.Roushan Banu rep. by GPA Mr.Mohd.Taiyab Ansari ..Petitioner and Smt.Shazli Fatima ..Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.Mohd.Azeemuddin Forroqui Counsel for the respondent: Mr. Srinivasarao Velivela The Court made the following:

Common Order: (Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy) Since the parties and the proceedings, out of which these two Civil Revision Petitions (CRPs)

arise, are common, they are heard and disposed of together at the instance of the respondent. Heard Mr.Mohd.Azeemuddin Forroqui, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.Srinivasa Rao Velivela, learned Counsel for the respondent.

At the instance of the respondent-landlady, the dispute between her and the petitioner-tenant was referred for arbitration. In the course of arbitration, the petitioner has filed Arbitration Application No.1 of 2016 for framing additional issues and Arbitration Application No.2 of 2016 for reopening the evidence of the respondent/claimant, given as PW.1, for further cross-examination. Arbitration Application No.1 of 2015 was partly allowed by framing additional issue and Arbitration Application No.2 of 2016 was dismissed. Feeling aggrieved by the orders passed in both these Applications, the respondent therein filed these Civil Revision Petitions. The necessity of adjudicating these CRPs is obviated for the reason that it is brought to our

notice by the learned Counsel for the respondent that the Arbitrator has passed an award on 02-062016. As the arbitration proceedings themselves have got concluded by the passing of the award, the cause in these CRPs has become infructuous. The petitioners are, however, left free to raise the aspects, which are raised in these CRPs, while challenging the award, if they are so advised.

Subject to the liberty given to the petitioners as above, the CRPs are dismissed.

As a sequel to dismissal of the CRPs, CRPMP.Nos.5062 and 5065 of 2016 are disposed of as infructuous.

______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) _________________ (G.Shyam Prasad, J) Dt: 16th August, 2016 lur