VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Allahabad High Court 2023 › High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

M/S Construction Company and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Disposed off/Decided on merits
Court
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Decided
28 November 2023
Case no.
WRIC 28499/2023

Judgment

Court No. - 40 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 28499 of 2023 Petitioner :- M/S Construction Company And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Naushad Ahmad Khan,Diwakar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Abhishek Srivastava,Apurva Hajela,Apoorva Hajela Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms. Arti Gupta holding brief of Sri Apoorva Jajela, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 - Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL) and Sri Raj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent No.3.

¶2The present writ petition is preferred for a direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent no.2 to pay the amount of Rs.1,59,50,000/- to the petitioners and to decide their representation dated 06.04.2023.

¶3Ms. Arti Gupta, learned brief holder of learned counsel for the respondent No.2, raises an objection by submitting that matter may be adjudicated in Arbitration and an application for the same has already been filed by the contesting respondent under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act on 19.10.2023. She submits that the petitioners have efficacious remedy of arbitration in view of agreement. She has placed reliance upon Clause 2.14 of the Agreement which deals with the arbitration. Photostat copies of Letter of Intent (LOI) and agreement are also brought on record as Annexures-1 and 2 respectively to the said application.

¶4Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as the contesting respondent itself has volunteered for an efficacious remedy and inclined to press the application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Needless to say, petitioners are at liberty to invoke the arbitration clause in view of the agreement.

5.With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 29.11.2023 NLY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Source: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.