After the matter was heard for some time, the learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that the matter has been pending for nearly six years after the award, and to avoid any further delay and to ensure that the proceedings under Section 34 were companypleted expeditiously, the appellant will have numberobjection for the dismissal for number prosecution, being set aside and the application under Section 34 being restored to file, provided the first respondent agreed to companyoperate with the Court for summary disposal of the proceedings.
The High Court, by the impugned order dated 12.12.2008 dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant holding that the appropriate remedy was by way of revision under Section 115 of CPC.
Learned Additional District Judge, Indore, before whom the said application was made by order dated 5.8.2008, held that the application for setting aside the dismissal, was maintainable.
The first respondent filed an application under Order IX, Rules 4 and 9 read with section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure Code for short for setting aside the dismissal.
An Arbitral award dated 20.10.2003 was made in favour of the appellant in a claim against the first respondent.
The appellant challenged the said order by filing a writ petition before the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
The first respondent filed an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Act for short for setting aside the said award.
The said application was dismissed for number prosecution on 27.6.2006.
The said order is challenged in this appeal by special leave.
The appellant raised a preliminary objection that the petition was number maintainable.
Leave granted.
This Court in Fiza Developers Inter Trade P Ltd. AMCI I Pvt.
Heard the companynsel.
Ltd. Anr.
