Delhi High Court · 2025-03-20
SUNEHRI BAGH BUILDERS PVT LTD vs DELHI TOURISM AND TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD
- Citation / case number
- CM(M)-521/2025 2025:DHC:1828
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Petitioner
- SUNEHRI BAGH BUILDERS PVT LTD
- Respondent
- DELHI TOURISM AND TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD
Judgment text excerpt
$~42 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 20th March, 2025 + CM(M) 521/2025& CM APPL. 16300-16301/2025 SUNEHRI BAGH BUILDERS PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dinkar Singh with Mr. Rohit Singh, Advocates. versus DELHI TOURISM AND TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vipul Garg and Mr. Gupreet Singh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. The claim of petitioner is pending adjudication before learned Sole Arbitrator. 2. The case is, already, at the stage of final arguments. 3. Petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 15.02.2025 passed by learned Sole Arbitrator whereby his application seeking production of certain documents has been dismissed. 4. This Court has gone through the abovesaid order dated 15.02.2025 which was passed by learned Sole Arbitrator, when it was already in the middle of hearing final arguments. 5. Learned Sole Arbitrator observed that similar opportunity had been granted to the claimant earlier on 07.09.2024 and the claimant did not avail the abovesaid opportunity and did not even inspect the record and, therefore, it did not accede to the abovesaid request. 6. This Court has also gone through earlier order dated 07.09.2024. 7. At that relevant time, the parties had been directed to file their Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 521/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:21.03.2025 17:59:45 affidavits for admission/denial of documents and it was at that relevant stage that the claimant had sought for inspection of respondent’s file and was even permitted to do so. The matter was thereafter taken up by learned Sole Arbitrator on 17.09.2024 when learned Arbitrator noticed that despite the opportunity being given in this regard, the claimant had no