MAA MAIHAR STEEL Vs. MSTC LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Court: The petitioner has preferred this application under Sec. 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 praying for an interim protective order during pendency of this proceedings under the aforestated Act and pursuant to the settled terms of agreement between itself and the respondent.

(2.) Fact remains that the sale order in favour of the petitioner has been terminated and re-auction of the goods has been scheduled to be held today itself (19/10/2022). Petitioner urges that during the entire course, the time limit for him to pay money has been extended, amount has been accepted for him after the extended period of time and also that he is ready to pay the residue amount of money.

(3.) It is alleged that without considering his bona fide action as above, the opposite party has gone arbitrarily to cancel the contract with him and forfeited the earnest money, earlier submitted by him with the opposite party.