MOHAN AGARWAL ALIAS MOHAN AGARWALA v. M/S GTL INFRASTUCTURE LTD
CRP(IO)/408/2023 · 2025-03-09
Devashis Baruah
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 20234 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 20234 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010227852023
2025:GAU-AS:2554
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/408/2023 MOHAN AGARWAL ALIAS MOHAN AGARWALA S/O LATE NANDARAM AGARWAL, R/O MAKUMKILLA, P.O.-MARGHERITA, P.S.-MARGHERITA, DIST-TINSUKIA, ASSAM, PIN-786188 VERSUS M/S GTL INFRASTUCTURE LTD REPRESENTED BY THE AREA/REGIONAL MANAGER, 3RD FLOOR, MAYUR GARDEN, OPPOSITE RAJIV BHAWAN, ABC, GUWAHATI, PIN-781005, ASSAM For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. R. Shome, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. R. Sarmah, Advocate
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER Date : 10.03.2025
Heard Mr. A. R. Shome, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. R. Sarmah, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent.
2. This is an application filed under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging the order dated 23.08.2022 passed in Misc. (J) Case
Page No.# 2/2 No.12/2022 whereby the application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was allowed thereby the suit was disposed and the matter was referred to Arbitration.
3. This Court has duly perused the suit so filed by the plaintiff and from a perusal of the said suit, it is seen that the said suit is for recovery of certain amounts which the petitioner herein claims to be the arrear rent which the petitioner is entitled from the respondent.
4. This Court has also taken note of the lease deed dated 13.06.2008 wherein a premises admeasuring 352 sq. meters was rented out to the respondent herein.
5. Taking into account that the suit was not filed for eviction but is a suit only filed for recovery of the amount, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the order dated 23.08.2022 passed by the learned Trial Court in Misc. (J) Case No.12/2022.
6. Accordingly, this Court finds no merit in the instant petition for which the same stands dismissed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant