Justice V.V.S. Rao Appointed Arbitrator in HMDA’s Dispute With Private Party

Hyderabad:L Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy of Telangana High Court appointed Justice V.V.S. Rao as one of the arbitrators in the dispute between East Hyderabad Expressway Limited and the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA). The judge was dealing with an application filed by the company, which had allotted the tender for the design, construction, development, operation finance and maintenance of the eight-lane access-controlled expressway under Phase IIA as an extension of Phase I of the ORR to Hyderabad city, for the package from Pedda Amberpet to Bongulur from 95 km to 108 km on build, operation, and transfer (BOT) (annuity) basis. The project was to be completed before June 2010. The parties to the agreement had various disputes with regard to the payment that was due from HMDA. It was the further case of an applicant that in August 2021, the HMDA took a U-turn from its commitment and assurances given in earlier meetings with regard to the claims of the applicant. Since the agreement between parties provides for settling disputes before an arbitrator, the petitioner appointed former judge Justice Devinder Gupta but the HMDA did not name its nominee. It contended that the applicant had approached the court without adhering to the terms and conditions of the agreement and without complying with the dispute resolution mechanism contemplated under Clause 39 of the agreement and the application deserved to be dismissed in limine. Rejecting the plea, Justice Bhaskar Reddy said that the scope of the court was restricted to see whether there is an arbitral dispute between the parties containing an arbitration clause or not. Further, it was well-settled in law that while deciding the question of appointment of an arbitrator, the court should not touch the merits of the case as it may cause prejudice to the case of the parties. Justice Bhaskar Reddy accordingly appointed a former judge of the court. The nominee arbitrator on behalf of the application and the nominee arbitrator on behalf of the respondents shall mutually appoint the presiding arbitrator. The arbitrator process shall be governed by the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and amendments thereof. Needless to state, the parties were at liberty to raise the issue under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996.

HC quashes criminal case in family dispute

Justice K. Surender of Telangana High Court quashed a criminal case filed before the judicial magistrate first class, Mahbubabad, against the spouse and family members, who had challenged a chargesheet filed against them in December 2021. The de facto complainant lodged a complaint in 2019 stating that she was married to the principal accused in 2017. Thereafter differences arose between them. The complaint was filed because of the alleged physical and mental harassment. On the basis of the complaint, the chargesheet was filed by the police in December 2021. Subsequently, the complainant filed an application for divorce by mutual consent and stated that the complaint was filed against the petitioners due to a misunderstanding, and she intended to withdraw it. The former husband paid `20 lakh, which was recorded by the senior civil judge at the time of the grant of divorce decree. Later, the de facto complainant failed to take steps for withdrawing the complaint filed under Section 498-A IPC and the relevant divorce provisions. That taking into consideration the undisputed documents, which were the orders passed in Hindu Marriage original petition (HMOP), and the receipt of Rs 20 lakh by the de facto complainant, who had remarried, Justice Surender was of the view that continuing criminal proceedings against the petitioners was nothing but abuse of the process of the court.