Granting Bail Does Not Shield Foreign Nationals from Executive Action on Visa Violations: Delhi High Court Contempt Jurisdiction Cannot Be Misused to Resolve Substantive Disputes or Replace Execution Mechanisms: P&H High Court Eviction Proceedings Must Follow Principles of Natural Justice: Telangana High Court Quashes Eviction Order under Senior Citizens Act Limitation Law | Sufficient Cause Cannot Be Liberally Interpreted If Negligence or Inaction Is Apparent: Gujarat High Court Mere Pendency of Lease Renewal Requests Does Not Constitute Bona Fide Dispute: Calcutta High Court Upholds Eviction Proceedings Under Public Premises Act CGST | Declaratory Nature of Safari Retreats Ruling Mandates Reassessment of Input Tax Credit Claims: Kerala High Court Changing Rules of the Game Mid-Way Violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution: Rajasthan High Court Disapproval of a Relationship Does Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide Without Direct Instigation or Mens Rea: Supreme Court Limitation Period Under Section 166(3) of the Motor Vehicle Act Cannot Defeat Victim’s Right to Compensation: Gujarat High Court Maintenance To Wife Cannot Be a Precondition for Bail: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 438 CrPC Court Cannot Rewrite Contract When Vendor Lacks Ownership of the Property: Calcutta High Court Dismisses Appeal for Specific Performance Royalty Can Be Levied on Minor Minerals Like Brick Earth, Irrespective of Land Ownership: Supreme Court Bail in Heinous Crimes Must Be Granted with Adequate Reasons and Judicial Scrutiny: Supreme Court Judicial Review in Disciplinary Cases Is Limited to Fairness, Not Reappreciation of Evidence: Supreme Court Prolonged Consensual Relationship Cannot Be Criminalized as Rape on False Promise of Marriage: Madras High Court No Interference in Judgments Without Perversity or Legal Error Under Section 100 CPC: Andhra Pradesh HC

Calcutta High Court Confirms Interim Order Restraining Simplex Infrastructures Ltd. From Dealing with Assets Pending Arbitration

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court, presided over by the Hon’ble Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya, confirmed the interim order granting relief to Bridge Track and Tower Private Limited in a dispute against Simplex Infrastructures Limited. The judgment, delivered on 19th July 2023, dealt with an application under Section 9 and Section 11 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, where the petitioner sought interim relief and appointment of an arbitrator.

The court’s decision upholds the petitioner’s claim against the respondent, Simplex Infrastructures Limited, and restrains them from dealing with or disposing of their assets and properties or creating any third-party rights on the subject matter of the disputes/arbitration agreements.

The crux of the ruling revolved around the respondent’s belated objection concerning separate arbitration clauses in six purchase orders. Justice Bhattacharya dismissed the respondent’s objection, remarking that the objection appeared to be an afterthought and cited the respondent’s act of treating the six purchase orders as one for payment purposes.

“In any event, the affidavit-in-reply of the petitioner clearly states that the respondent has paid Rs. 32 lacs as on 27th February 2019 by way of a single cheque... Having treated the 6 purchase orders as one and having clubbed all of them for making a onetime payment of Rs. 32 lacs, the respondent cannot now take the point of maintainability on the ground of each being a separate purchase order,” Justice Bhattacharya wrote in the judgment.

The court also rejected the respondent’s claim of a change in circumstances since the interim order and emphasized that no subsequent events justified modifying the said order.

The ruling marks a crucial development in the ongoing dispute, and the court’s confirmation of the interim order brings relief to Bridge Track and Tower Private Limited. The judgment reinforces the importance of adhering to arbitration clauses and maintains the sanctity of such clauses in commercial agreements.

Date of Decision: 19th July 2023

Bridge Track and Tower Private Limited  Vs. Simplex Infrastructures Limited

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Bridge_Track_And_Tower_Private_vs_Simplex_Infrastructures_Limited_on_19_July_2023_Cal.HC_.pdf"]

Similar News