Allahabad High Court
NEERAJ SRIVASTAVAversusMANOJ RASTOGI
- Decided
- Bench
- PIYUSH AGRAWAL
Holding
The application is dismissed for want of prosecution and the interim order is vacated.
Summary
The applicant, Neeraj Srivastava, filed an application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, against Manoj Rastogi. The matter was listed before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, with counsel Vishesh Rajvanshi for the applicant and Syed Ali Murtaza for the respondent. No representative appeared on behalf of the applicant at the hearing. The court held that the proceeding could not continue in the absence of the applicant and dismissed the case for want of prosecution. Consequently, any interim order that had been granted was vacated.
Issues considered
- Whether an application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act can proceed when the applicant fails to appear before the court
- Whether the interim order, if any, should remain in force
Legislation cited
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — s. 11(4)
Subjects
- Arbitration
- Section 11(4)
- Dismissal for want of prosecution
- Interim order vacated
- Procedural default
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
ARBITRATION AND CONCILI. APPL.U/S11(4) No. - 144 of 2023
Neeraj Srivastava
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Manoj Rastogi
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vishesh Rajvanshi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Syed Ali Murtaza
Court No. - 7
HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J.
1. List is revised.
2. Nobody is present on behalf of the applicant.
3. The case is dismissed for want of prosecution.
4. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
5. This order has been passed in the presence of Mr. Raza Abbas, learned
counsel for the respondent.
(Piyush Agrawal,J.)
April 29, 2026
Abhishek Gupta
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK GUPTA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…