IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No. 323 of 2009 Between: 1 E.Sudershan Reddy S/o.E.Ram Reddy R/o.H.No.17-1-382/K/SB/43, Shri Balaji Nagar, Champapet, Sayeedabad, Near Manda Balreddy Marriage Hall Lane, Hyderabad. 2 E.Manjula W/o.E.Sudershan Reddy R/o.H.No.17-1-382/K/SB/43, Shri Balaji Nagar, Champapet, Sayeedabad, Near Manda Balreddy Marriage Hall Lane, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 M/s. GE Money Financial Services Ltd., (Erstwhile GE Country wide Consumer Financial Services Ltd), having its registered office at 401-402, 4th Floor, Aggarwal Millennium Tower, E-1, 2,3 Netaji Subhash Place, Pitam Puram, Delhi. 2 Before SH Neeraj Malhotra, Sole Arbitrator, E-25, LGF, Jangpoura Extension, New Delhi - 110014. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ or direction, more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 1 & 2 in passing the Arbitration award in case No. 591 of 2006, dt. 20.10.2007 on the file of the SH Neeraj Malhotra, Sole Arbitrator, E-25, LGF, Jangpura Extension, New Delhi - 110014 and the E.P.No.330 of 2008 on the file of the M.S. Poonam Chaudhary, Additional District Judge, Delhi dt. 26.8.2008 is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioners : MR.THUMUCHANDRA SHEKAR Counsel for the Respondents : The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.323 of 2009 ORAL ORDER : (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma) From the docket proceedings, it could be seen that the matter had been adjourned several times at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Today, when the matter came up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioners is not present and there is no representation on his behalf. 3. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed for default/ non- prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA __________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH 30-03-2009 Msr THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.323 of 2009 30-03-2009 (Msr)