High court’s ‘cryptic’ order annoys the Apex Court

In an appeal case of Navnirman Development Consultants vs. District Sports Complex, the work on the sports complex in Pune was completed in 2005, though the bill was yet to be paid. The contractor sought arbitration and requested the State Government to appoint its arbitrator. It later, the High Court had appointed an arbitrator who gave an award of Rs. 25 lakhs in favour of the contractor. The government authorities approached to district court which reduced the award to Rs. 7 lakhs. This led to an appeal in the high court and the “cryptic reasoning” by which the contractor’s pleas were dismissed with a short note. The Supreme Court last week criticized the Bombay High Court for dismissing an arbitration appeal with a “cryptic” order when neither party was present before it. The judgment said: “The high court while dismissing the appeal did not set out even the factual controversy properly nor dealt with any of the grounds taken by the parties.” The Supreme Court asked the high court to reconsider the contractor’s appeal on merits and dispose of it expeditiously in view of the decade-old delay in adjudication. “The least which was expected of the high court was to give brief facts and brief reasons to enable the superior court to examine the legalities,” the judgment said.

In an appeal case of Navnirman Development Consultants vs. District Sports Complex, the work on the sports complex in Pune was completed in 2005, though the bill was yet to be paid. The contractor sought arbitration and requested the State Government to appoint its arbitrator. It later, the High Court had appointed an arbitrator who gave an award of Rs. 25 lakhs in favour of the contractor. The government authorities approached to district court which reduced the award to Rs. 7 lakhs. This led to an appeal in the high court and the “cryptic reasoning” by which the contractor’s pleas were dismissed with a short note.

.