DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY ADRA DEBJANI GHOSAL vs M/S V - BRO ENGINEERING SERVICE — AO-COM/10/2026
Case under Arbitration and Conciliation Act Section 34. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 07th May 2026.
CNR: WBCHCA0103792026
Next Hearing
12th March 2026
e-Filing Number
02-03-2026
Filing Number
AO-COM/9/2026
Filing Date
02-03-2026
Registration No
AO-COM/10/2026
Registration Date
05-03-2026
Judge
HON'BLE JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK , HON'BLE JUSTICE MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI
Coram
HON'BLE JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK , HON'BLE JUSTICE MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI
Bench Type
Division Bench
Category
GROUP B (CIVIL MATTERS) ( 2 )
Sub-Category
Arbitration ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
STAMP REPORTER (SR) SECTION
Decision Date
07th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY ADRA DEBJANI GHOSAL
Respondent(s)
M/S V - BRO ENGINEERING SERVICE
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK , HON'BLE JUSTICE MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI
FOR ADMISSION
APPLICATION
APPLICATION
APPLICATION
APPLICATION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | FOR ADMISSION |
| 07-05-2026 | APPLICATION |
| 06-05-2026 | APPLICATION |
| 05-05-2026 | APPLICATION |
| 04-05-2026 | APPLICATION |
Orders
Case Summary: AO-COM/10/2026 The High Court of Calcutta dismissed the Railway's appeal challenging the trial court's rejection of its delay condonation application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Though the appellate court initially condoned the delay in filing the appeal itself, it found no merit in the underlying challenge to the arbitral award, as the appellant failed to provide adequate explanation for the delay in challenging the June 1, 2024 arbitral award and presented inconsistent grounds before different courts. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: AO-COM/10/2026 The High Court of Calcutta dismissed the Railway's appeal challenging the trial court's rejection of its delay condonation application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Though the appellate court initially condoned the delay in filing the appeal itself, it found no merit in the underlying challenge to the arbitral award, as the appellant failed to provide adequate explanation for the delay in challenging the June 1, 2024 arbitral award and presented inconsistent grounds before different courts. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts