Allowed

Mantara Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. Ankit Associates and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC1 Nov 2017ARBAP/126/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this arbitration application, the High Court of Bombay, on the objectionless filing, appointed Mr. Karl Tamboly as Sole Arbitrator to decide disputes under a Development Agreement. The court mandated disclosure under the 1996 Act and cost of the application from the respondent.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Sole Arbitrator Mr. Karl Tamboly; Respondent ordered to pay Rs. 25,000 as cost.

Mantara Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ankit Associates and 2 Ors. — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

56.arbap.126.2012.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. 126 OF 2012

¶4

Mantara Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs.

¶5

Ankit Associates & Ors.

¶6

.. Applicant

¶7

.. Respondents

¶8

Mr.Anand Shitap i/b Jamshed Ansari for applicant. Mr.Vasim A. Shaikh i/b A.N. D'silva for respondent no.2.

¶9

CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J. DATE : 1^ST NOVEMBER 2017

¶10

P.C.

¶11

1 The applicant is seeking appointment of an Arbitrator in accordance with the provisions of Clause 24 of the Development Agreement dated 24^th

¶12

October 2000. Clause 24 reads as under :

¶13

“24 All disputes and differences between the parties hereto arising out of this agreement or in relation to the interpretation or effect of any of the terms and conditions contained in the agreement or in relation to the rights and contentions of the parties hereto shall be referred to arbitration or two arbitrators, one to be appointed by each party to the dispute and such arbitration shall be held in accordance with the provisions of Arbitration Act 1940 or any other statutory modifications or re-enactment thereof for the time being in force except that such Arbitrator and the umpire appointed by them shall have summary powers and the award given by the arbitrators or the umpires shall be final and binding on the parties hereto. Such arbitration shall take place in Mumbai.”

¶14

2 Since disputes arose between the parties, notice dated 15^th February

¶15

2012 invoking arbitration was issued by applicant through their advocate. It

¶16

is stated in the application that no reply was received to the said notice. It

¶17

should also be noted that even no reply to the present application has been

1/3

Shraddha Talekar PS

56.arbap.126.2012.doc

¶22

filed by respondents.

¶23

3 In the circumstances, application is allowed in terms of prayer clause

¶24

(a).

¶25

Mr.Karl Tamboly, an Advocate practicing in this Court is appointed as Sole Arbitrator to decide all disputes and differences arising out of, in connection with and relating to the Development Agreement dated 24^th October 2000. The fees and expenses of the Arbitrator to be shared equally between the parties and the same shall be subject to costs in the arbitration proceedings.

¶26

4 The Learned Arbitrator shall give disclosure in writing as required under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, within three weeks of receiving a copy of this order, to the advocates for both applicant as well as respondents. Petitioner also to forward a copy of this order to the Sole Arbitrator. Parties are at liberty to raise all points before the Learned Arbitrator.

2/3

Shraddha Talekar PS

56.arbap.126.2012.doc

¶31

5 Application accordingly disposed.

¶32

Respondent to pay a sum of Rs. 25,000/- as cost of this application to

¶33

applicant within four weeks.

¶34

(K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)

¶35

3/3

¶36

Shraddha Talekar PS

Mantara Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. Ankit Associates and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mantara Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. Ankit Associates and 2 Ors.

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

Consulting Engineering Services (India) Private Limited Vs Supreme Mahavir Panvel Indapur Tollways Private Limited

Babulal Pukhraj Sanghvi Prop. of M/S Nandishwar Steel Vs M/S Snsp Engineers Private Limited Cin 74999PN1998PTC012799

Amit Sharma Vs Gol Offshore Limited

Sardar Patel Cooperative Housing Society Limited Vs Associated Projects Pvt. Ltd. and Suresh Patel and 18 Ors. (Applicant)

Sardar Patel Cooperative Housing Society Limited Vs Associated Projects Pvt. Ltd.

Shree Samarth Erectors and Developers Vs Kanak Dixit and 4 Others