Amina Ayesha vs Model Constructions

G. Rohini, J.—This appeal is preferred u/s 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against the order dated 29.11.2013 in O.P. No. 726 of 2013 on the file of the Court of the III-Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. By the order under appeal, the petition filed by the respondent herein u/s 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act to grant an interim order restraining the respondent therein/appellant before us from alienating the schedule mentioned flats till the completion of the arbitral proceedings was allowed.

We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties.

Admittedly, the appellant herein/respondent in O.P. No. 726 of 2013 is disputing the transaction under the development agreement which contained an arbitration clause. However, neither the said agreement nor any other documents were marked in evidence by the respondent herein before the Court below. Though the Court below referred to certain documents, as we could see, the order under appeal does not even contain the Appendix of Evidence. Under the circumstances, we find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that the order under appeal came to be passed without appreciation of the evidence on behalf of the respondent herein/petitioner in O.P. No. 726 of 2013. Therefore, the order under appeal is liable to be set aside on that ground alone. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order under appeal is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Court below with a direction to hear both the parties and pass an appropriate order afresh in O.P. No. 726 of 2013, following due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.