← Library
Madras High CourtOP/2/2021dismissed for nonprosecution

Ms.Sp Consulting Inc(Sp Teks, Inc) As Illinois Corporation, Represented By Its Director, v. Paridas Govindasamy, S/O. Govindasamy,

2024-06-11Honourable Mr Justice Krishnan Ramasamy4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11.06.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Ms.SP Consulting, Inc (SP Teks, Inc) an Illinois Corporation, Represented by its Director, Mr.Satyanarayana Reddy Kandimalla, 44, Wood Oaks Drive, South Barrington, IL 600 010 USA., Representing through his Power Agent, Mr.Elangovan V.S.

... Petitioner Vs.

Paridas Govindasamy ... Respondent Prayer:

Original Petition filed under Section 15(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to appoint a sole Arbitrator in place of the erstwhile Arbitrator in ACP.No.1 of 2019 and resolve the disputes between the petitioner and the respondent arising in the MOU dated 18.04.2017. 1/4

For Petitioner : No appearance For Respondent : No appearance

ORDER

This Arbitration Original Petition has been filed to appoint a sole Arbitrator in place of the erstwhile Arbitrator in ACP.No.1 of 2019.

2. In the present case, vide order dated 01.04.2024, this Court directed the Registry to list this matter before the learned Master for adducing evidence by the petitioner.

3. When this matter was taken up by the learned Master on 15.04.2024, though the petitioner was present before the learned Master, he was not ready to adduce the evidence. Hence, the learned Master passed the following order:

"Petitioner present. Not ready to lead evidence. The learned counsel again seeks time stating that he is going to take application of appointment of Power of Attorney.

2/4

On 12.03.2024 and 01.04.2024, the Hon'ble Judge has passed conditional orders to adduce evidence. Despite the orders, again the petitioner seeks time, stating the above reason.

Hence, for summon orders, list before the Hon'ble Judge's Court."

4. Today, this matter is listed before this Court, however, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, which shows that he has no interest to contest this matter. Hence, this Court is inclined to dismiss this petition for non-prosecution.

5. Accordingly, this Original Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No cost.

11.06.2024 Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No nsa 3/4

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J., nsa 11.06.2024 4/4