Disposed

Shri Yashwant Gangaram Kandpile v. Shri Rajaram Gangaram Kandpile and Ors.

Bombay HC25 Mar 2015CHS/420/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge referred the family dispute concerning properties K-Mall and Pearl Homes to arbitration for the plaintiff and defined defendants, while obtaining undertakings for status quo and delineating the arbitrator's powers.

What did the court decide?

The dispute sent for arbitration with an agreed Sole Arbitrator; status quo undertakings granted regarding specific flats and the mall; costs to be borne equally.

Shri Yashwant Gangaram Kandpile Vs Shri Rajaram Gangaram Kandpile… — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

901-NMSL1143-14.DOC

¶2

Atul

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT (L) NO. 437 OF 2014

¶4

WITH

¶5

NOTICE OF MOTION (L) NO. 1143 OF 2014 AND

¶6

CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 420 OF 2015

¶7

Shri Yashwant Gangaram Kandpile…Plaintiff
Versus

¶8

Shri Rajaram Gangaram Kandpile & Ors.…Defendants

¶9

Mr. Vishal Kanade, i/b Mr. S.S. Deokar, for the Plaintiff.
Mr. P.P. Prabhu, for Defendants Nos. 1 to 5.
Mr. Madhur Rai, i/b M/s. PRS Legal, for Defendant No. 6.

¶10

CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 25th March 2015

¶11

PC:-

¶12

1.This family dispute is agreed to be referred to the arbitration
with the following order.

¶13

2.Mr. Kanade, learned Advocate for the Plaintiff, tenders a
draft Chamber Summons for amendment to the plaint. Leaving

¶14

1 of 5

¶15

901-NMSL1143-14.DOC

¶16

open all contentions on both sides, the Chamber Summons is made
absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Amendment to be carried out
on or before 6th April 2015. Reverification dispensed with.
Chamber Summons to be numbered forthwith. It is clarified that
among the contentions left open to the Defendants is also the
contention as regards non-disclosure in the plaint as originally filed
of the additional material now introduced by amendment.

¶17

3. The Chamber Summons is disposed of in these terms.

¶18

4.Two properties that are part of the subject matter of this
dispute require a specific order. One of these is a mall known as K-
Mall. On behalf of Defendants Nos. 1(a) to 1(e) and 2 to 5, a
statement is made on instructions that these Defendants will not,
without leave of the Court, alienate, transfer, sell or create any third
party rights in any part of this mall, except for renewing any existing
leave and licence agreements or entering into creating new leave
and licence agreements in respect of any premises within this mall.
That statement is accepted as an undertaking to the Court.

¶19

5.It is noted that the mall is today already mortgaged to
Defendant No. 6. This mortgage is an exception to the foregoing
statement made on instructions.

¶20

6.The other property in question is a building of residential
flats known as Pearl Homes. There are 36 flats in all in this building.
Flat No. 606 is exclusively reserved and set aside for allotment to
some family members. A statement is made on behalf of the
contesting Defendants that this flat will not be sold, transferred,

¶21

2 of 5

¶22

901-NMSL1143-14.DOC

¶23

alienated or put in possession of any third party without leave of the
Court. This statement is accepted as an undertaking to the Court.

¶24

7.As regards Flats Nos. 103 and 106, these are stated to be
unsold. In respect of these two flats, the Defendants agree and
undertake to this Court that they will not sell, transfer, alienate or
part with possession, or create any third party rights therein
including by way of leave and licence without leave of the Court.
This statement is also accepted as an undertaking to the Court.

¶25

8.In respect of 21 flats in the building, documents of sale have
already been registered. In respect of the remaining 12 flats,
advance payments of about 90% of the purchase price have been
received, but documents are yet to be executed. In respect of these
34 flats, the Defendants are at liberty to complete the transactions
in question subject to their setting out complete particulars and
details of each of these transactions, including disclosing the
agreements in question on affidavit. This affidavit shall be filed
before the learned Arbitrator to whom the matter will now be
referred pursuant to the following directions.

¶26

9.The submission of Mr. Kanade that nine of these flats have
apparently been sold to the family members but without any
documentation is noted. All contentions in that behalf are expressly
kept open.

¶27

10.Mr. Naushad Engineer, an Advocate of this Court is
requested to take up the assignment as a Sole Arbitrator. The
amended plaint will be the statement of claim before Mr. Engineer.

¶28

3 of 5

¶29

901-NMSL1143-14.DOC

¶30

Mr. Engineer is requested to call a meeting at the earliest possible
for further directions of filing a reply to the statement of claim, etc.
It is clarified that the contesting Defendants will be entitled to file a
counter-claim and that there is no restriction on the learned
Arbitrator in exercising his discretion in considering an application
for interim relief either.

¶31

11.All costs of the arbitration including arbitrator’s fees will be
borne equally by the Plaintiff on one side and the contesting
Defendants on the other.

¶32

12.The reference to arbitration is only with regard to the
disputes between the Plaintiff and Defendants Nos. 1(a) and 1(b)
and Defendants Nos. 2 to 5. Defendant No. 6 is not concerned with
this reference to the Arbitrator.

¶33

13.The learned Arbitrator is requested to publish his Award at
the earliest within a period of six months from today.

¶34

14.I am informed that Defendant No. 6 has declined to disburse
a loan previously sanctioned on account of a previous status-quo
order. It is clarified that the present order is now the only order that
will govern the parties. The 6th Defendant is at liberty to proceed
with the loan disbursal application in accordance with its usual
practice.

¶35

15.It is also clarified that the present order is only in order to
maintain a certain status quo till the learned Sole Arbitrator has had
an opportunity to consider the matter and to consider any interim

¶36

4 of 5

¶37

901-NMSL1143-14.DOC

¶38

application that may be filed before him. The learned Arbitrator will
be at liberty to pass an interim order modifying this order on an
application by either party.

¶39

16.The Suit and the Notice of Motion are disposed of in these
terms. Refund of Court fee in accordance with the Rules.

¶40

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

¶41

5 of 5

Shri Yashwant Gangaram Kandpile v. Shri Rajaram Gangaram Kandpile and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Yashwant Gangaram Kandpile v. Shri Rajaram Gangaram Kandpile and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr.Ashdin Mackey Pithawala (Plaintiff NO.1) Vs Mrs. Kainaaz Ashdin Pithawala (Plaintiff NO.2)

Abhimanyu Rajendra Prasad Neogi Vs Karanaditya Neogi

Smt. Radhabai Kishore Kadam Vs Smt. Rakmabai Baburao Nanavare......Deceased.

Shri Yashwant Gangaram Kandpile Vs Shri Rajaram Gangaram Kandpile and Ors.

Radha Vishoo Adnani. Vs Jaswant S. Adnani and Ors.

Reena Sudhir Nevrekar and Anr. Vs Vidya Ramchandra Amonkar and Ors.