Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply And Sewerage Board v. M/S.Tecton Engineering And Constructions Llc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION) WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.SUNDAR A.No.1125 of 2021 in O.P. Diary.No.135203 of 2019 In the matter of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and In the matter of Arbitration Between M/s.Tecton Engineering -VsChennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board CHENNAI METROPOLITAN WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD No.1, Pumping Station Road, Chintadripet, Chennai-600 002, Now at 75, Santhome High Road, MRC Nagar, Chennai-600 028 ..Petitioner -VsM/S.TECTON ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTIONS LLC, New No.808, GR Complex, II Floor, Nandanam, Chennai - 600 035 ..Respondent

Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to condone the delay of 102 days in representing the O.P.in S.R.No.135203/2019 on the file of this Hon'ble Court.

This application coming on this day before this court for hearing, the court made the following order:

Mr.G.Janakiraman learned standing counsel for Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (CMWSSB) is before this Virtual Court on behalf of applicant/petitioner in captioned matter.

2. Captioned application has been filed with a prayer for condonation of delay in representation. The reasons for delay have been set out in paragraph No.3 of supporting affidavit.

3. A perusal of paragraph No.3 of supporting affidavit brings to light that shifting of office and limited functioning of office owing to lock down, papers being misplaced owing to shifting have been given as reasons.

4. Mr.Amalaraj S.Penikilapatti learned counsel who has joined this Virtual Court submits that he has lodged a caveat vide Caveat Petition No.1311 of 2021.

5. Be that as it may, learned counsel Mr.Amalaraj S.Penikilapatti accepts notice on behalf of lone respondent in captioned application and submits that he does not oppose or object to the prayer being acceded to.

6. This Court having perused the affidavit filed in support of captioned application, having heard learned counsel on both sides, having being satisfied that the reason adduced is acceptable and having noticed that learned counsel for lone respondent does not oppose or object to the prayer in captioned application being acceded to, deems it appropriate to allow the captioned application.

7. Captioned application allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Sd/.M.S.J.

17.03.2021 //Certified to be a true copy// Dated this the th day of 2021.

SU/22.03.2021 COURT OFFICER(O.S.) From 25.09.2008 th e Registry is issuing certified copies of the Order/Judgment Decree in this format.