The 2006 Bench disposed of an application for interlocutory reliefs under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, observing that the parties had agreed to arbitration. Both Notices of Motion were dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1678 OF 2006
IN
SUIT NO.1369 OF 2006
Dinesh C. Gaglani....Plaintiff
V/s.
Kirit C. Gaglani & Ors.....Defendants
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2691 OF 2006
IN
SUIT NO.1369 OF 2006
Dinesh C. Gaglani....Plaintiff
V/s.
Kirit C. Gaglani & Ors.....Defendants
Mr.Amit Jain i/b M/s.Kanga & Co. for the Plaintiff.
Mr.Y.N. Adhia for Defendant Nos.1 and 2.
Mr.Umesh Shetty for Defendant No.3.
Mr.Uday Bobde i/b Mr.M.P. Talavade for Defendant No.4.
CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J.
DATED : 29TH AUGUST, 2006.
P.C. :
1.The parties have agreedto go for
arbitration. The suit has been disposed of by a
separate order passed today.
2.The application for interlocutory reliefs to
be made under Section 17 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996.
3.Both the Notices of Motion are dismissed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dinesh C. Gaglani
Kirit C. Gaglani
S.J. VAZIFDAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court