W IN THE HIGH CGURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPEI§”/ W. PB No. 33 Bé OF 2003 f” ‘ PETITIONER‘\T\W5~ u:3am1:;4zr: - 0mm? Ralpur whwmy \ Through its EXiLVdWQ E~";==:’.- , aé "CQJI‘ VERSUS WRIT PETITION UNDER ART;CLE22éé27 / / OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN NATURE OF CERTIORARI MANDAMUS PROHIBITION AND OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OR WRITS DIRECTION OR N DIRECTIONS ORDER OR ORDERS: “-mr‘.¢‘x*¥ ‘§E£i;-_‘ -.'_-. ‘~=‘~5€ N RESPOND§i§T N M/s Sarin ..,_...-" Company, Raipur ‘ Shri Ashok Sarin, . ~<A§Q§h S/o Chamanlal . gm "“ $‘g§§i§“” Devenqra Nagar, . “(“6 X 3.." / ‘1.» M ChhattlsgeLrh. XI—HC-22 HW,W,W 3mm w@.33°(6 m /a;[ 2003 .................. . ............. W ............................ mmw WW§WW %3?%1I3{1%¥T 4-3-2m35 Mr. KN. Agarwai with §3etitionet r. Ashish $hriva$tava, céun$e§ far he § , Mr. Sunil Gtwani, counsei f r the respondent Heafd on LANaVmESiZQD , appiica€ion for substitutma of £he Raipur evempment Auihoriiy §n piace‘ f‘me get§tigner herein 3:7 aftar figmg cf 211$ patiticn, vitie naiificatian {gated ‘ Septemhey, 2QG$, Chha€i§sgarh Raipa‘g‘a {Ex‘éraordinary}, the Raipur veiopment Authoriiy has again begn recanstituted. Therefora in viaw 0f tha reawns menihngd ,m theagpiicatim, it is aimwed, V Qoun$e£ far the getiti‘ ner to incm‘purate thh amendmast m té’ie petitéan itseEf. By this application, the p titianer $eek$ i2: add paraé 5i§ (A) and 5M8. {8) regarding fiiing of applicaii n under Secticn 34 cf the krbétraiics’s a’nd $enci§iatian Aa. 199$. ta which {eamed cmmaa: far the regycndent hex: 3% ebject‘acn. There‘fcre, ihi$ appicatian is mac: aiéewed. Cauagei far the getitioner to cafryaut me amend em. My} heard on LANQMQ? 2%5. Na: heafd feamea‘ caun farthe pariie$ an the me'r‘até cfthe éagg. The peiiiianer has prefe ihi's writ pe%étian, bemg aggfieved by the arder dated 31g Juiy. 2693. p $5ed by the 6m Add5t§¢na§ Qistrict Judge. Ra§pun in C.S.Nc.41-B/‘2002. w efeb‘y the learned Raditienai Dies‘ti’im Judge ’ihe responcient hgreén fiiec‘: Lander Seciion itasues can be decééev. withwt wee-wing e wh’de de¢iding iha application 1,5? cf the C.P.C. ardered that ihe evidence «3f the $ar€§es. 9 e ; s i r . 'D XI—HC-22 WWW WWEWW ’ 2 ,v $Wm Learned caun$ei for the pe'titioner submi‘ited that the request gf ihe fespandent herein was that an the $sues be decided tegether. There was m requeet by i‘he respondent herein that the other ieeuee cam be decided wéthgut the evidence. .Therefare, the impugned cwrcier war? passed by the {earned Additienai District Judge without am; grayer by the resgondent herein. Learned ceunsei argued the: the perusai a? issuee Annexure R3 wouiei show that at ieast iseue NQSE, 6' {3K} & $ gm require ta be preveei by ihe evidence adduced by the parties. {an the other ianci, learned for the reepcnderit argued that tangy in reseeei of issue Nes5 {~3U& 6 (). evirience is reauirec; arid he evidence ie required fer deeming issue Ne.5. Therefore, as agreeij by €30 h the counsei, issue Nos.6 (Si) $4 6 (Ki) t0 a eecis. as each. iheevidence is reqeiieé er te decide these twe iesnes. As far ae pinicn, for this issue nc era! evicience is ieauired This i e can be decided based an the reievant daeuments on the fiie of the arbit ion proceedings. The ieamed Ada‘itienai Eistriet Judge for ihai purpe$ee an cai! for the recere of the ariaiiratien pmceedings and eased en that rd. can; eei fer ihe eeriies can argaze en the pain? wheiher the petiiiener reiri was given the epneriuniiy ie owes“ examine the witnesses 0r not Ae r as, issue No.3 is canceined, that ear; be decided 0n the basis of inierpretacn cf ciause 2‘3 fer which he erai evidence is required. Therefore, in View of the ove, the erder impugneu is; set aside and ' ihe ieerneei Aediiienai Disirict Ju i (X C} . cenaén extent invaive the feciuei :0 be adduceci by the parties in iseue NOS ii“ whee ed, in my a s u r t is direciegi i0 aiiew the games is edduce e e. r 0 e a d XI—HC-22 WW#‘WW éa‘mm abave Le. issue Nssji 3: S (er: requisitiened and thase issues a §eamed Additicna! Di$trict Judge decide the mai‘ter as eariy as pass With me abeve omen/a aisposed of. Cansequentiy, MM}P.N¢237§/2004 siands §§s§asec§ 6f. Parties are entitbd for certi1 Soa m 3rd ef the arbitrathn preceedings can ha an be decided based an ihe recerd. The {5 directed t0 expedite the woceedings and ibie. :ians and diregtiona £he Wm peimc-n is led copy of th§s orde r