The Notice of Motion was disposed of as not pressed since a subsequent Notice of Motion (No. 1118 of 2010) rendered the present application irrelevant and did not survive.
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.
nms865.10.sxw
1
ssm
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 865 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:-
In view of subsequent Notice of Motion No. 1118 of 2010, the
present Notice of Motion does not survive and therefore, the learned
counsel appearing for the Petitioner has not pressed the present
Motion. The same is accordingly disposed of as not pressed.
(ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
Souren Chander Alimchandani
Chander Rupchand Alimchandani
Anoop V. Mota
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
