MG POLYPLAST INDUSTRIES PVT LTD vs SANEER ANAND

Judgment text excerpt

$~O-46 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 1828/2024 Date of Decision: 17.02.2025 IN THE MATTER OF: MG POLYPLAST INDUSTRIES PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr.Rajeev Aggarwal and Mr. Mayank Kamra, Advs. versus SANEER ANAND .....Respondent Through: None. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV JUDGEMENT PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL) 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The affidavit of service dated 03.01.2025, placed on record by the petitioner, reads as under: “I, Ankit Gupta, the deponent hereinabove do hereby solemly affirm and state hereunder: 1. I say that I am Counsel for Petitioner in the above captioned case and competent to swear & file the present affidavit. 2. I say that I have served the advance copy of Petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to the Respondent at [email protected] through my email [email protected] vide E-mail dated 19.11.2024 at 11:11 am, I say that the said email has not Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRIYA Digitally Signed Signing Date:21.02.2025 By:PURUSHAINDRA 17:45:59 KUMAR KAURAV been returned/ bounced back to me. -sd- Depondent Verification: I, Ankit Gupta do hereby verify on this 19th day of November, 2024 at New Delhi that the contents of the above said affidavit are true and correct my knowledge and nothing material has been concealed there from. -sd- Depondent” 3. Mr. Rajeev Aggarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that notices were sent via speed post and courier to three addresses of the respondent available with the petitioner. He further states that one of these addresses matches the one mentioned in the invoices exchanged between the parties. 4. Additionally, he submits that the notices were