2025:HHC:36339 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Arbitration Appeal No. 441 of 2025 Date of decision: 29.10.2025 First Newsmedia Private Ltd. …Appellant Versus The President, Haryana Pradesh Congress Committee …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice G. S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Appellant : Mr. Surender Singh Hooda, Director of First Newsmedia Pvt. Ltd. (In person). G. S. Sandhawalia , Chief Justice (Oral) The present appeal has been filed under Section 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the ‘Act’) by the successful claimant of the arbitration award dated 09.01.2019, which order was duly upheld by the learned Single Judge in Arbitration Case No. 58 of 2019, titled Dr. Ashok Tanwar & Anr. vs. First Newsmedia Pvt. Ltd., decided on 05.09.2025, whereby the petition filed by respondents No. 1 and 2 under Section 34 of the Act, had been dismissed. 2. The appellant appearing in person is aggrieved against the observations made in paras 22 to 24 of the judgment dated 05.09.2025 of the learned Single Judge, whereby his objection as such that the delay in re-filing the petition had wrongly been condoned at an earlier point of time on 2 2025:HHC:36339 29.11.2019, should have again been reconsidered by the learned Single Judge at the time when the matter was being decided on merits. 3. We are of the considered opinion that once the petition under Section 34 of the Act had already been dismissed in favour of the present appellant, no cause of action as such arises and only an academic exercise remains at this point of time whether the delay had been rightly condoned way back on 29.11.2019. 4. It is also to be noticed that the learned Single Judge vide the said order also had rejected the issue of pre-deposit of 75% of the amount in OMP No. 343 of 2019, which had been challenged by respondents No. 1 and 2 herein before the Apex Court successfully. It is to be noticed that the Apex Court while deciding the matter on 22.11.2021 had noticed that apart from the deposit of Rs. 26,07,000/- by the respondents at that stage, the amount fell short of about Rs.7,00,000/-, in case 75% of the amount was to be deposited, in view of Section 19 of the Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006. It has been noticed that a sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- had also been recovered from the bank account of the present respondents No. 1 and 2. Therefore, the Special Leave Petition was allowed and directions were issued to the learned Single Judge to hear the case on merits in accordance with law. 3 2025:HHC:36339 5. At no point of time, the present appellant had chosen to assail the order passed by the learned Single Judge way back on 29.11.2019 and at that point of time, respondents No. 2 and 3 had assailed the said order before the Division Bench of this Court, which dismissed their appeal on 10.01.2020, which matter was further taken to the Apex Court by way of SLP, as noticed above. 6. Once the present appellant had chosen not to assail the said order after passing of the same on 29.11.2019, now he cannot turn around and argue that the learned Single Judge should have re-decided the issue. The order having become final in condoning the delay in re-filing the petition and the matter having been heard on merit and the issue which is being now raked up is only an academic exercise which even otherwise had not been challenged on earlier occasion. The present appeal would not be maintainable in the present facts and circumstances. 7. Resultantly, the present appeal is dismissed, so also pending applications, if any. (G. S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice (Jiya Lal Bhardwaj) 29th October, 2025 Judge (sanjeev)