RAKESH BALA ANEJA Vs. SUSHIL BAJAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal has been filed against the Orders dated March, 17, 2004 passed by the Learned Single Bench in respect of a Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. By means of this Application it had been prayed that a Receiver be appointed to manage Alka Cinema at Sector-15, Noida, and further that the Respondents, their servants, agents and assigns be restrained from interfering with the Management/running of the said Cinema till the Award in favour of the Petitioner becomes executable. The Objections that Petitioners have filed against the Award are still pending adjudication.

(2.) By a detailed Order the learned Single Judge has come to the conclusion that good and sufficient grounds had been made out for the appointment of a Receiver. However, the learned Single Judge did not consider it appropriate to appoint either the Petitioner or an Advocate as the Receiver. Instead a Chartered Accountant had been appointed as a "Local Commissioner to supervise the accounts of Alka Cinema, Sector-15, Noida, till further Orders and file monthly statements in this Court on or before 15th of each month. For this purpose the Chartered Accountant shall have all the rights to take in his possession the previous books of accounts of the Cinema and instruct the staff of the Cinema properly for maintaining the accounts".

(3.) The Respondents, both before the learned Single Judge as well as before us, have not assailed the aforementioned Orders dated March 17, 2004 by preferring an Appeal. This considerably narrows down the scope of the Appellate proceedings before us. After detailed arguments the position arrived at is that the Local Commissioner is allegedly inimical towards the Appellants and is interfering in the day to day management of the Cinema. By Orders dated 20.11.2006, the Bench comprising Dr.Mukundakam Sharma, (as the Learned Chief Justice then was) and Hima Kohli, JJ., had stayed the appointment of the Local Commissioner.