Souren Chander Alimchandani v. Chander Rupchand Alimchandani and 2 Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
The bench adjourned a notice of motion contending separate hearing needs in view of the rejection of Section 9 petition for hearing on 20th January 2011.
What the court decided
nms1118.10.sxw
1
ssm
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1118 OF 2010 IN
ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 987 OF 2009
Souren Chander Alimchandani ....Petitioner. Vs.
Chander Rupchand Alimchandani
....Respondents.
Mr. Pravin Samdhani, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kunal Mehta i/by M/s. Wadia Ghandy for the Petitioner.
Mr. Haresh Jagtiani, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Siddhesh S. Bhole, Mr. Anil D’Souza and Ms. Nisha Srinivasan i/by Mr. Yashpal M. Jain for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. J.P. Sen, i/by Mr. Ravi Rattesar for Respondent No. 3.
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATE : 16th December, 2010
PC:-
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Souren Chander Alimchandani
- respondent
Chander Rupchand Alimchandani
Coram
Anoop V. Mohta
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court