Court No. - 24 Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 912 of 1991 Petitioner :- State Of U.P. Respondent :- Hannam Khan Petitioner Counsel :- H.S. Sahai Respondent Counsel :- V.R. Singh Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma,J.
List is being revised.
Though the name of Sri V.R. Singh and Sri U.S. Sahai has been printed
in the cause list as counsel for the respondents but neither they are
present nor there is any request for pass over or adjournment of the
case.
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the records.
It has been stated by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that a
contract for construction of Syphon at Saryu Main Canal at 46.200 Km.
was entered between the petitioners and the opposite party No.1 and 2
in the year 1986. As per the terms and condition of contract, the
opposite parties No.1 and 2 were required to complete the work upto
15.6.1988 but they completed 20% of the work entrusted to them by
15.6.1988 and as such, agreement was cancelled. Feeling aggrieved,
the opposite parties No. 1 and 2 filed an application under Section 20 of
the Arbitration Act, 1940, which was subsequently registered as Regular
Suit No. 265/89. Notice was issued and in reply thereof, the petitioners
have filed their objection. The suit was decided on 25.4.1990 and the
matter was referred for arbitration. Thereafter, the opposite parties No. 1
and 2 moved an application for injunction in Regular Suit No. 265/89 on
19.9.1990 under Section 151 CPC, on which, the opposite party No.3,
vide order dated 19.9.1990, restrained the petitioners from inviting fresh
tenders or executing them. Thereafter, the petitioners filed objections
against the application of opposite parties No. 1 and 2 on 26.10.1990, to
which reply has been filed by the opposite parties No. 1 and 2 on
30.10.1990 but despite efforts, the opposite party No. 3 has not
disposed of the matter till date.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that interest of justice would
suffice, if the opposite party No.3 is directed to decide the objection of
the petitioners, in accordance with law, expeditiously.
In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of finally with a
direction to the opposite party No.3 to decide the objection of the
petitioners, in accordance with law, expeditiously, say, within a period of
two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 20.7.2010
Ajit/-