← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/7722/2022dismissed

Shri. Sadguru Construction Company, Savli, Akola Thr. Managing Partner, Jagannath S/O Chhagan Patel v. State Of Maha., Thr. Secretary, Rural Development And Water Conservation Dept., Mumbai And ORS.

2023-07-04Hon'Ble Shri Justice Rohit Baban Deo,Hon'Ble Shri Justice M. W. Chandwani3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION 7722 OF 2022 Shri. Sadguru Construction Company, "Savli", Tapadiya Nagar, Akola, through its Managing Partner, Shri Jagannath s/o. Chhagan Patel, age 62 years, Occ. Business, R/o. Tapadiya Nagar, Akola, Tahsil District Akola .....PETITIONER ...V E R S U S...

1. State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Rural Development and Water Conservation Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 32

2. Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Local Sector (L.S.) Division, Buldana, Tahsil District Buldhana

3. Director of Insurance, Maharashtra Govt. Insurance Funds, 264 Griha Nirman Bhawan (MHADA), First Floor, Opp. Kala Nagar, Bandra (East), Mumbai 51

4. Chief Engineer Office, Nagpur having its office at ..RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. D.S. Patil, counsel for petitioner.

Mr. M.K.Pathan, AGP for respondents 1&2/State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM:- ROHIT B. DEO & M.W. CHANDWANI, J J.

DATE : 04.07.2023

JUDGMENT (Per: Rohit B. Deo, J.) Heard.

2.

The learned counsel for petitioner Mr. D.S. Patil invites our attention to the order dated 25.8.2020, rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench in Writ Petition 1913/2015. 3.

The Co-ordinate Bench noted the preliminary objection raised by the respondents that there is in existence an arbitration clause.

4.

The present petitioner withdrew Writ Petition 1913/2020 with liberty to invoke the arbitration clause. 5.

There is nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner has invoked the arbitration clause. 6.

Assuming that the petitioner has invoked the arbitration clause, and the respondents have unjustifiably refused to appoint arbitrator, the remedy of the petitioner lies

elsewhere.

7.

The petition is dismissed.

(M.W. Chandwani, J.) (Rohit B. Deo, J.) belkhede RAVINDRA SURESHRAO P.A. to the Hon'ble Judge