Srinagar, Oct 31: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh on Monday asked Principal District and Sessions Judge (PD&SJ) Srinagar to file reply to a petition, seeking appointment of Arbitral Tribunal with regard to the running of the cafeteria (Food Court) at Moominabad Court Complex here.
“The appointment of Arbitrator on Food Court Food Court situated at Moominabad Court Complex Srinagar will be considered only after response is field by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Srinagar, by tomorrow,” a bench of Chief Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey said.
The court listed the plea for further hearing on November 2 asking Sr AAG Mohsin Qadri to ensure filing of response on behalf of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Srinagar, by tomorrow with a copy in advance to the other side.
In its plea through advocate Manzoor Ahmad Dar M/s Miras Foods has sought the appointment of Arbitral Tribunal for adjudication of the disputes which have arisen between the parties in relation to the contract for running of the Food Court.
The appointment of Arbitral Tribunal has been sought on the ground that due to imposition of Covid-19 lockdown and restrictions on the public movement, there was the suspension of business activities. The contractor has claimed remission in payment of license fee in relation to Food Court premises. He has also sought extension of tenure of license period on account of suspension of business activities due to Covid-19 pandemic based on orders and circular issued by the High Court and an extension in tenure of license period on account of satisfactory performance.
“Examining the contents of the petition supported by the documents, response of the respondent (PD&SJ) is necessary as the allotment order on which agreement is drawn between the parties, has come into effect on 05.08.2017 valid for a period of one year commencing from 05.08.2017 up to 04.08.2018 and the contract for running the Food Court at District Court Complex Moominabad, Srinagar, was renewable thereafter, depending on the satisfactory performance of the Contractor,” the court said.