GODAVARI MARATHWADA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION THR EXECUTIVE ENGINEER JAYAKWADI S.G. BHALERAO vs S. S. DESHMUKH — ARBA/30/2021
Case under Arbitration and Concilation Act 1996 Section 37. Disposed: --DISMISSED on 08th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM030136812021
Filing Number
ARBA/11250/2021
Filing Date
03-04-2021
Registration No
ARBA/30/2021
Registration Date
29-07-2021
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ARUN R. PEDNEKER
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ARUN R. PEDNEKER
Bench Type
Single
Judicial Branch
Civil
Decision Date
08th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
GODAVARI MARATHWADA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION THR EXECUTIVE ENGINEER JAYAKWADI S.G. BHALERAO
Respondent(s)
S. S. DESHMUKH
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ARUN R. PEDNEKER
PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH CIVIL SIDE MATTERS
FOR ORDERS
FOR ORDERS
FOR ORDERS
FOR ORDERS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-07-2021 | PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH CIVIL SIDE MATTERS |
| 08-05-2026 | FOR ORDERS |
| 04-05-2026 | FOR ORDERS |
| 27-04-2026 | FOR ORDERS |
| 17-04-2026 | FOR ORDERS |
Orders
Case Summary: ARBA/30/2021 The High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad dismissed the irrigation corporation's arbitration appeals against a contractor's claims for work renovation. The court rejected the appellant's jurisdictional challenge, finding the Principal District Judge had proper jurisdiction since the dispute value (Rs. 11,31,441) fell below the Rs. 50 lakh commercial court threshold. On limitation grounds, the court held that the limitation period under Article 18 of the Limitation Act commenced from the final bill payment date (01.09.1999) or denial thereof, not contract completion, making the arbitration notice issued on 19.02.2000 timely and within the three-year limitation period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: ARBA/30/2021 The High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad dismissed the irrigation corporation's arbitration appeals against a contractor's claims for work renovation. The court rejected the appellant's jurisdictional challenge, finding the Principal District Judge had proper jurisdiction since the dispute value (Rs. 11,31,441) fell below the Rs. 50 lakh commercial court threshold. On limitation grounds, the court held that the limitation period under Article 18 of the Limitation Act commenced from the final bill payment date (01.09.1999) or denial thereof, not contract completion, making the arbitration notice issued on 19.02.2000 timely and within the three-year limitation period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts