HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPEAL UNDER SECTION 37 OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996 DEFECTIVE No. - 104 of 2025 Chief Justice's Court HON'BLE ARUN BHANSALI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that on account of subsequent development whereby the bank guarantee qua which the application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was filed, has been invoked by the respondents, the appeal has been rendered infructuous. 2. In view thereof, the appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous. 3. During the pendency of the present appeal, it was contended on behalf of the respondent, based on instructions, that the parties were attempting to resolve the dispute mutually and a meeting was scheduled in 3rd week of September 2025, however, learned counsel for the parties are unaware of the outcome. 4. In case the dispute between the parties does not get resolved mutually, it is expected of the respondent to take steps for appointment of the Arbitrator in accordance with law. October 8, 2025 AHA/Jyotsana Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ravi Kant, Saurabh Tripathi, Prabha Shankar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : Sanjay Kumar Om (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) M/s Viddut Kumar Jain .....Appellant(s) Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- AFZAL HUSAIN ABBASI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad