IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL. Arbitration Petition No. 10 of 2007 Arien New Delhi Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi, having its registered office R‐53 Vikas Marg, Shakarpur, New Delhi, Registered office at C/6/46/1, Safdargunj Development Area, New Delhi …………Petitioner. Versus Hindustan Steel Works, Constructions Ltd. 5/1, Commissiariat Road, Hasting, Kolkata – 22 having its Registered Office at P‐34 A, Gariahat Road (South), Kolkata‐22 and Delhi Office at 11‐ B, VANDNA (11th Floor) 11, Tolstay Marg, New Delhi 01, Site Office at Tanakpur Barrage, Tanakpur District Champawat (Uttaranchal/Uttarakhand) ……….Respondent. Sri Naresh Pant, Advocate, for the petitioner. Hon’ble V.K. Gupta, C.J. This petition is hopelessly time‐barred. On the own showing of the petitioner the initial cause of action accrued some time in the year 1988. Even if this Court takes into account the fact about the appointment of an arbitrator in the year 1998, as mentioned in paragraphs 10 and 11 of the petition, there is no explanation whatsoever as to what the petitioner had been doing between the year 1998 and the year 2007 when this petition was filed in this Court. Because of the aforesaid delay and the fact that the petition is patently time‐barred, it is dismissed. (V.K. Gupta, C.J.) Dated: March 3, 2008 SP