IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 12.01.2017 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. AUTHINATHAN O.S.A.Nos.174, 175, 176 and 177 of 2013 and 211, 212, 213 and 214 of 2013 and M.P.Nos.1 of 2014 ( 4 in nos.)
1. BEFESA AGUA, SAU CIF A 41290792, Avda Buhaire, 2 41018 Sevilla, Spain
2. BEFESA INFRASTRUCTURE INDIA PVT LTD., 2nd Floor, Gee Gee Universal, No.2 Mc. Nichols Road, Chetpet, Chennai-600 031
3. BEFESA CONSTRUCTION & TECHNOLOGIA AMBIENTAL SAU Y19 CONSTRUCCIONES Y DEPURACIONES SAU, UNION TEMPORAL DE EMPRESAS (“UTE”) CIF A 41290792, Avda Buhaire, 2 41018 Sevilla, Spain Appellants in OSA Nos.174 to 177 of 2013 Vs
1. IVRCL INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECTS LTD., M-22/3RT, Vijayanagar Colony, Hyderabad 500 057 represented by its Director R. Balarami Reddy
2. CHENNAI WATER DESALINATION LTD, 30A South Phase 6th Cross Road, TVK Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032
3. M/s CITIBANK N.A. CHENNAI Ground Floor, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002 Respondents in O.S.A Nos.174 to 177/2013 Appeals filed Under Order 36 R.1 of Original Side Rules r/w clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 02.04.2013 in A.Nos.3370-3371/2011 and O.A.No.610 and 611 of 2011(OSA Nos.174 to 177/2013) and dated 15.04.2013 in Review Application Nos.1769, 1771, 1773 and 1776 of 2013 in A.Nos.3370-3371 of 2011 and O.A Nos.610 and 611 of 2011(OSA Nos.211 to 214 of 2013).
For Appellants : No appearance For R.1 & R.2 : Mr.Triyambak.J. Kanne For R.3 : No appearance COMMON JUDGMENT [Judgment of the court was delivered by S.NAGAMUTHU, J.] These appeals are filed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 02.04.2013 in A.Nos.3370-3371/2011 and O.A.No.610 and 611 of 2011(OSA Nos.174 to 177/2013) and dated 15.04.2013 in Review Application Nos.1769, 1771, 1773 and 1776 of 2013 in A.Nos.3370-3371 of 2011 and O.A Nos.610 and 611 of 2011(OSA Nos.211 to 214 of 2013).
2. When the matters are taken up for hearing, there is no representation for the appellants. The respondents 1 and 2 are ready. These appeals arise out of the Order passed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking interim directions. Arbitration proceedings have been pending from 2011 onwards. The appellants appear to have lost interest in prosecuting these appeals, which is evident from the fact that there is no representation today.
3. Having regard to the fact that the parties can work out their remedy before the Arbitration Proceedings, we are not inclined to interfere with the interim orders. Therefore, all the appeals are dismissed.
S.NAGAMUTHU,J.
And
N. AUTHINATHAN,J.,
sr
4. The learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that there is a talk going between the parties to settle the issue.
5. It is for them to settle and to report before the Arbitration Tribunal. No costs. Consequently, connected MPs are closed.
(S.N.J.,) (N.A.N.J.,) 12-01-2017 Index : Yes/no Internet : Yes/no sr To The Sub Assistant Registrar, (Original Side), High Court, Chennai.
O.S.A.Nos.174, 175, 176 and 177 of 2013 and 211, 212, 213 and 214 of 2013 http://www.judis.nic.in