AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This is an appeal from a judgment and order of the learned court below, dated 21st March, 2025 dismissing the application by the appellant under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
We find that in this application very vexed questions arise out of the memorandum of understanding between the government of Meghalaya and Suraksha Salvia Global LLP dated 21st June, 2019. The respondent terminated it on 30th January, 2025. The appellant says this termination is wrongful. The contention of the appellant was that the agreement is also valid and binding between Suraksha Salvia LLP and the government.
The preliminary point taken in this Section 9 application by the respondent was that the applicant before the trial court was not registered under the Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008 and not a party to the arbitration agreement. The application was not maintainable by them. On this technical ground, the application was dismissed. The merits were not even addressed by the Court.
Therefore, in this appeal we have to first go into the maintainability point and thereafter enter into the merits, if necessary.
We formally admit the appeal.
As the parties are represented in Court today, we propose to hear out the appeal dispensing with all formalities. We expedite hearing of the appeal.
Advocate-on-Record for the appellant shall file an informal paper-book and file the same in this Court by 24th April, 2025, serving a copy thereof on Advocate-on-Record for the respondents at least seven days before the next date fixed.
List the appeal for hearing on 14th May, 2025.
Considering the fact that further to the above agreement the appellant is operating a diagnostic centre at Pasteur Hill, Shillong with medical equipment, accessories and staff, let status quo regarding possession thereof by the appellant be maintained until this Court is in a position to hear out the appeal.
Liberty is granted to either party for mentioning this appeal for its expeditious hearing.
This order will not prevent the parties to enter into an amicable arrangement for relocation of the equipment to an alternative place.