The Chief Manager, H.P. Telecom vs. Kashmir Singh CMP No.29169 of 2025 in CMPMO No.526 of 2024 25.03.2026 Present: Mr. Rajiv Jiwan, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Hitender Verma, Advocate, for the applicant/petitioner. Mr. H.S. Rangra, Advocate, for the respondent. CMP No.29169 of 2025 Reply to the application has been filed. By way of the present application, a prayer has been made to recall the order dated 28.03.2025, by virtue of which, the petition has been dismissed for want of prosecution. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant has draw the attention of this Court towards the fact that number of arbitration cases were filed between the same parties and were disposed of on 02.01.2025 and on account of the said fact, the applicant remained under bonafide belief that the said case has also been disposed of along with the main case. These facts have been pleaded to highlight that the requisite steps for summoning the respondents could not be taken on account of the said bonafide belief. When, put to notice, the factual position, as mentioned in the application, has been contested/controverted. Considering the true scope of the provisions of under Order 9, Rule 4 of CPC, this Court is satisfied that the applicant was having justifiable cause for not pursuing the matter, as the arbitration cases bearing Nos.581, 582, 583 & 584 of 2023, between the same parties, were disposed of, by this Court on 02.01.2025. Moreover, the matter should be decided on merit, not, on the basis of the technicalities. Considering the said fact, application under consideration is allowed and the order dated 28.03.2025 is ordered to be recalled. Petition is ordered to be restored to its original number. CMPMO No.526 of 2024 Vide order of even date, passed in CMP No.29169 of 2025, the petition has been ordered to be restored to its original number. In Arbitration Case Nos.581 of 2023 to 584 of 2023, this Court, on 02.01.2025, while deciding the cases, has granted the following relief, in para-7 of the judgment, which is reproduced as under:- “7. Conclusion For the foregoing discussion, the judgments passed by the learned District Judge Mandi on 12.01.2023 in Case Nos. (i) Objection Pet. No. 02/2022 (Reg. No. 03/2022) and Objection Pet. No. 03/2022 (Reg. No. 04/2022) are set aside to the extent they hold that this Court alone will have the jurisdiction to entertain & decide the objections preferred under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act against the arbitral awards. It is held that in the instant case, jurisdiction to decide the objections preferred under Section 34 of the Act against the arbitral awards will be before the Principal Court of original jurisdiction at Shimla. As a result, Arb. Case Nos. 582 & 583 of 2023 filed by claimant – Kashmir Singh and Arb. Cases Nos. 581 & 584 filed by the Telecom Department are disposed of as not maintainable before this Court. The petitioners in these cases shall be at liberty to move the appropriate Court having jurisdiction for filing objections against the arbitral awards. In case such objections are preferred within two weeks from today, the same shall be decided in accordance with law. Petitions stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any”. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and the order dated 12.01.2023, passed by the learned District Judge, Mandi, in Case No.45 of 2022, titled as The Chief General Manager H.P. & Others versus Kashmir Singh, is set-aside by holding that the present petition is not maintainable, before this Court and the petitioners are at liberty to approach the appropriate Court having jurisdiction for filing the objections against the arbitral award. The objections be filed within a period of six weeks from today. Copy of this order be sent to the learned District Judge, Mandi. (Virender Singh) Judge March 25, 2026 (subhash)