JITENDRA PRASAD SUKLA Vs. DIPAK ADAK
LAWS(CAL)-2005-5-8
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on May 05,2005

JITENDRA PRASAD SUKLA Appellant
VERSUS
DIPAK ADAK Respondents




JUDGEMENT

Chakrabarti, J. - (1.)The case made out in the application for stay filed in the present appeal is that the appellant entered into an agreement on 7th May, 1999 with the respondent and the proforma respondents for development of the suit property. After the plan was sanctioned by the concerned municipal authorities a supplementary agreement was entered into by and between the appellant and the respondent on 15th January, 2001. The construction of the building was completed in terms of the said agreement and possession of the area in the constructed building was handed over to the respondents in accordance with the agreement. Necessary payments have been also made by the appellant to the respondents in terms of the said agreement. When the appellant was negotiating with the prospective buyers of the balance area of the constructed building, a proceeding was started before a learned Arbitrator in respect of which copy of the order passed by the learned Arbitrator and an application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 were served upon the appellant. The"appellant preferred an appeal being FMAT No. 4156 of 2004 against the said order dated 24th November, 2004 passed by the learned Arbitrator and an application for stay was also filed in connection with the said appeal. Ultimately the said appeal was disposed of by this Bench.
(2.)Thereafter the respondent No. 1 filed an application under Section 26 of the said Act before the learned Arbitrator praying for appointment of expert for inspecting the suit premises in terms of the schedule annexed to the said application. An objection was filed by the appellant to the said application and thereafter the learned Arbitrator adjourned the hearing of the said application and made certain queries both from the appellant and from the claimants/respondents and being aggrieved by the said order dated 8th March, 2005, the present appeal was filed.
(3.)Heard Mr. S. P. Roy Chowdhury, learned Advocate for the appellant and Mr. B. Mitra, learned Advocate for the respondent No. 1.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.