K. K. And Associates v. Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai

903-ARBP714-17.DOC Shephali

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 714 OF 2017 KK & Associates

...Petitioner

Versus

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

...Respondent

Mr Atul Damle, Senior Advocate, with Priyanka Naik, i/b Aparna Kalathil, for the Petitioner.

Mr Sagar Patil, for the Respondent-MCGM.

CORAM:

G.S. PATEL, J.

DATED:

21st January 2020 PC:- 1.

On instructions, Mr Damle does not press prayer clauses (a) and (b). As regards prayer clause (c), which seeks a restraint against blacklisting by the MCGM, Mr Patil for the MCGM makes a statement on instructions that the process prescribed in law is being followed. The statement is noted and accepted. Mr Damle confirms that there is no communication yet in regard to any blacklisting or proposed blacklisting nor any show cause notice issued to the Petitioner. The statement is also noted.

2.

The Petition is disposed of as not pressed with these observations.

21st January 2020

903-ARBP714-17.DOC 3.

Liberty to the Petitioner to file a fresh proceeding for appropriate relief, should the need arise.

(G. S. PATEL, J) 21st January 2020