Disposed

M/S. Bharat Udyoig Limited, Thr. Its Dir. Srichand Kukreja v. Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation

Bombay HC12 Apr 2019ARP/45/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order in arbitration petition No. 45 of 2019 deals with the appointment of an arbitrator as the Municipal Commissioner cannot act as an arbitrator due to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The court appoints Advocate Vaibhav Sugdare as the sole arbitrator and fixes procedural directions for disclosure and hearing.

What did the court decide?

Advocate Vaibhav Sugdare appointed as sole Arbitrator; direction to file disclosure under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) by April 30, 2019.

M/S. Bharat Udyoig Limited, Thr. Its Dir. Srichand Kukreja Vs… — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

Nitin

¶2

1 / 2 929-ARP-45-2019.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 45 OF 2019

¶5

M/s.Bharat Udyog Limited ...Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

...
Navi Mumbai Municipal CorporationRespondent

¶8

Mr.Nikhil Patil i/b. Mr.Prabhakar Jadhav for the Petitioner.
Mr.R.P.Sakhadeo for the Respondent.

¶9

CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. DATED : 12TH APRIL,2019

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

Admittedly, there exists an Arbitration Agreement between the parties and

¶12

disputes have arisen between them. However, the Arbitration Clause provides that the
Commissioner, Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (Respondent No.1) shall act as
Arbitrator to decide the disputes between the parties, which cannot be done in view of
sub-Section 5 of Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. In view
thereof, the following Order is passed :

¶13

i.Advocate Vaibhav Sugdare, is appointed as the sole Arbitrator to decide the
disputes between the parties arising out of Tender dated 9th January, 2014.

¶14

ii.The learned Arbitrator shall file his disclosure under Section 11 (8) read

¶15

with Section 12(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 on or before 30th
April, 2019.

¶16

2 / 2 929-ARP-45-2019.doc

¶17

Nitin

¶18

iii.The parties and / or their Advocates shall appear before the learned

¶19

Arbitrator in his chambers, on 2nd May, 2019 at 5.00 a.m. and obtain necessary

¶20

directions.

¶21

iv. All contentions of the parties are kept open.

¶22

v. The arbitration expenses shall initially be borne by the parties equally.

¶23

vi. The venue of Arbitration shall be at Navi Mumbai.

¶24

2. The above Arbitration Petition is accordingly disposed off.

¶25

( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. )

M/S. Bharat Udyoig Limited, Thr. Its Dir. Srichand Kukreja v. Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Bharat Udyoig Limited, Thr. Its Dir. Srichand Kukreja v. Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation

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

Mrs. Vijaya Diesh Kunden Vs Mrs. Geets Jaydeep Kher

Siem Offshore Rederi as Vs Altus Uber Imo No. 9385300 (Def.) and Swordfish Shipco Ltd. (Applicant) and Globotrans Prologistix P

Bhaskarkumar C Devadiga Vs the Official Liquidator of M/S Navinon Ltd.

Jagannath Balaji Ghodke and Ors. Vs Suvarna Anil Ghodke and Anr.

M/S. K B Tiwari Electricals Co. Pvt. Ltd. Thr. Its Director Mr. Kadedin Bhagwatiprasad Tiwari Vs Union of India Thr. Cwe and Anr.

M/S. Ashoka Bridgeways Vs State of Maharashtra, through Executive Engineer