Disposed

Usman Gani Essa Sherawala and 2 Ors. v. Salim Vali Mohammed Bilakhya and Anr.

Bombay HC11 Feb 2015ARBAP/120/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order referred disputes arising from a Partnership Deed to sole arbitration. It stipulated a six-month timeline for the award, set the venue at Mumbai, and mandated equal cost sharing. A prior interim order was quashed, and parties were directed to meet the arbitrator.

What did the court decide?

Disputes referred to sole arbitration of Mr. Rohan Rajyadakshya; prior order dated 17-12-2014 superceded; parties directed to meet arbitrator.

Usman Gani Essa Sherawala and 2 Ors. Vs Salim Vali Mohammed… — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

arbp 1548 of 2014 (927).sxw

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO.1548 OF 2014

¶3

Usman Gani Essa Sherawala and Ors. .....Petitioners Versus Salim Vali Mohammed Bilakhya and Ors. …..Respondents WITH

¶4

ARBITRATION APPLICATION (L) NO.201 OF 2015

¶5

Usman Gani Essa Sherawala and Ors. .....Applicants Versus Salim Vali Mohammed Bilakhya and Ors. …..Respondents

¶6

Mr. Mayuresh Lagu, for Petitioners.

¶7

Mr. Dinesh Kadam, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶8

Mr. Yogendra Singh i/by Mr. Ashish Mishra, for Akash SRA Co-op. Society (proposed).

¶9

CORAM: S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. DATED: 11^th February, 2015

¶10

P.C.

¶11

Heard the learned Advocates for the parties and by consent, the following order is passed :

¶12

(i) The disputes between the parties arising out of the Partnership Deed dated 01-04-2006 are referred to the sole arbitration of Mr. Rohan Rajyadakshya, Advocate.

¶13

(ii) The learned Arbitrator shall endeavour to pass his Award within a period of six months from the date of this order.

¶14

(iii) The parties and their Advocates shall meet the learned Arbitrator on 13-02-2015 at his Chambers at 5.30 p.m., and obtain necessary

¶15

1/2

¶16

ssp

¶17

arbp 1548 of 2014 (927).sxw

¶18

directions in the matter.

¶19

(iv) In the meantime, the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall obtain concurrence of the Petitioners for the purpose of development of the partnership property under the SRA Scheme. The Petitioners shall grant their concurrence as and when called upon by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to do so. However, it is clarified that the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 seeking concurrence of the Petitioners and the Petitioners granting such concurrence, shall be without prejudice to all the rights and contentions of the parties, in all proceedings including the Arbitration proceedings.

¶20

(v) In view thereof, the order dated 17-12-2014 shall no longer

¶21

be in force.

¶22

(vi) The cost of the arbitration shall initially be borne by the

¶23

parties equally.

¶24

(vii) The venue of arbitration shall be at Mumbai.

¶25

(viii) The parties shall be at liberty to make an Application before

¶26

the learned Arbitrator under Section 17 of the Act seeking appropriate reliefs if they so desire.

¶27

(ix) The above Arbitration Petition as well as Arbitration

¶28

Application (L) No.201 of 2015 accordingly stand disposed of.

¶29

( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. )

¶30

2/2

¶31

ssp

Usman Gani Essa Sherawala and 2 Ors. v. Salim Vali Mohammed Bilakhya and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Usman Gani Essa Sherawala and 2 Ors. v. Salim Vali Mohammed Bilakhya and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Fullerton India Credit Co.Ltd. Vs M/S. Milestone Interactive Pvt.Ltd. and 3 Ors.

Laqshya Media Pvt. Ltd. Vs World Series Hockey Private Limited (Cin U92400MH2011PTC213530)

Sandeep Steels Vs Shivam Parivar Developers Pvt. Ltd. (Cin U45200MH2005PTC152371)

Shashikala Rathi and 3 Ors. Vs M/S Kieon Developers Pvt.Ltd

Tulsabai v. Chandak and 2 Ors. Vs M/S. Kieon Developers Pvt.Ltd.

Sunil Chandak and 2 Ors. Vs M/S. Kieon Developers Pvt. Ltd.