Step in proceedings under arbitration law includes an adjournment request to file a written statement, defeating stay relief.

After service of summons, a defendant's oral request for adjournment to file a written statement was treated as a step in the proceedings for the purposes of section 34 of the Indian Arbitration Act. The court rejected the distinction between an oral and written request, holding that an adjournment sought to enable filing of the written statement has the same legal effect either way. A precedent relied on by the party seeking stay was held inapplicable because it concerned different facts. As a result, the stay application was not maintainable and the appeal failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a defendant who, after service of summons, seeks adjournment to file a written statement can be said to have taken steps in the proceedings so as to disentitle it to a stay under section 34 of the Indian Arbitration Act.

Analysis: The request for adjournment to file a written statement was treated as a step in the proceedings. The distinction sought to be drawn on the ground that the request was oral was rejected, since an oral request for adjournment for that purpose has the same effect as a written one. The cited precedent dealing with a different factual situation was held inapplicable.

Conclusion: The application for stay under section 34 was not maintainable, and the appeal failed.

---