M/S KAUSHAL SHARMA vs NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY AND 3 ORS. Advocate - DY.S.G.I. — Arb.P./36/2026

Case under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section SEC. 11 (6). Next hearing: : -.

CNR: GAHC010103072026

Next Hearing

: -

e-Filing Number

22-05-2026

Filing Number

Arb.P./5883/2026

Filing Date

22-05-2026

Registration No

Arb.P./36/2026

Registration Date

27-05-2026

Judge

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

Coram

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

10247 - Arbitration Cases ( 237 )

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Acts & Sections

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section SEC. 11 (6)

Petitioner(s)

M/S KAUSHAL SHARMA

Adv. MR K L GUPTA,MR KRISHNANGSHU B,MR KRISHNANGSHU B, ,MR KRISHNANGSHU B

Respondent(s)

NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY AND 3 ORS. Advocate - DY.S.G.I.

GENERAL MANAGER, NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY, MALIGAON, GUWAHATI

DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY, GATI - SHAKTI UNIT

SR. DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY

Orders

01-06-2026
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

Case Summary: Arb.P./36/2026 M/S Kaushal Sharma filed an Arbitration Petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against Northeast Frontier Railway and three other respondents. On 01.06.2026, Justice Soumitra Saikia issued notice returnable within four weeks, with notices waived for all respondents who accepted service through their counsel. The petitioner was directed to furnish extra copies within one week, and the matter was adjourned for hearing after the returnable date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Arb.P./36/2026 M/S Kaushal Sharma filed an Arbitration Petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against Northeast Frontier Railway and three other respondents. On 01.06.2026, Justice Soumitra Saikia issued notice returnable within four weeks, with notices waived for all respondents who accepted service through their counsel. The petitioner was directed to furnish extra copies within one week, and the matter was adjourned for hearing after the returnable date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case