Disposed

Prashant Tarachand Chitodkar v. Union of India and Others

Bombay HC9 Aug 2021WP/3874/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of multiple writ petitions concerning an arbitral award pending challenge under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court held that the absence of a stay order does not impede enforcement and remained open for parties to take appropriate steps.

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions disposed of; petitioners allowed liberty to take appropriate steps for execution; contentions kept open on merits.

Prashant Tarachand Chitodkar Vs Union of India and Others — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

WP No.3644/21 & Ors.

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

189 WRIT PETITION NO.3644 OF 2021

¶5

KANTILAL AADHAR PATIL

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

¶8

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Deshpande Chaitanya C. AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.G. Karlekar Advocate for Respondents 1 & 3 : Mr. A.N. Patale Advocate for Respondent 2 : Mr. D.S. Manorkar

¶9

190 WRIT PETITION NO.3657 OF 2021

¶10

SAMBHAJI SHANKAR PATIL

¶11

VERSUS

¶12

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

¶13

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Deshpande Chaitanya C. AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. P.K. Lakhotiya Advocate for Respondents 1 & 3 : Mr. A.N. Patale Advocate for Respondent 2 : Mr. D.S. Manorkar

¶14

191 WRIT PETITION NO.3728 OF 2021

¶15

SAGAR CHANDRABHAN AHER

¶16

VERSUS

¶17

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

¶18

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Deshpande Chaitanya C.

¶19

AGP for Respondent/State : Mrs. V.N. Patil-Jadhav Advocate for Respondents 1 & 3 : Ms. S.S. Chindanani Advocate for Respondent 2 : Mr. D.S. Manorkar

¶20

192 WRIT PETITION NO.3743 OF 2021

¶21

SATISH BALKRISHNA JOSHI

VERSUS

WP No.3644/21 & Ors.

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

¶26

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Deshpande Chaitanya C. AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. A.R. Kale Advocate for Respondents 1 & 3 : Mr. A.B. Dhongade Advocate for Respondent 2 : Mr. D.S. Manorkar

¶27

193 WRIT PETITION NO.3874 OF 2021

¶28

PRASHANT TARACHAND CHITODKAR VERSUS

¶29

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

¶30

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Deshpande Chaitanya C. AGP for Respondent/State : Mrs. V.N. Patil-Jadhav Advocate for Respondents 1 & 3 : Mr. A.N. Patale Advocate for Respondent 2 : Mr. D.S. Manorkar

¶31

194 WRIT PETITION NO.3875 OF 2021

¶32

JAGATRAO RAMESH PATIL

¶33

VERSUS

¶34

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

¶35

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Deshpande Chaitanya C. AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.P. Tiwari Advocate for Respondents 1 & 3 : Mr. A.N. Patale Advocate for Respondent 2 : Mr. D.S. Manorkar

¶36

WRIT PETITION NO.3744 OF 2021

¶37

JAGATRAO RAMESH PATIL

¶38

VERSUS

¶39

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

¶40

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Deshpande Chaitanya C. AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.P. Tiwari Advocate for Respondents 1 & 3 : Mr. A.N. Patale Advocate for Respondent 2 : Mr. D.S. Manorkar

¶41

WP No.3644/21 & Ors.

¶42

¶43

WRIT PETITION NO.3793 OF 2021

¶44

JAGATRAO RAMESH PATIL VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

¶45

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Deshpande Chaitanya C. AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.P. Tiwari Advocate for Respondents 1 & 3 : Mr. A.N. Patale Advocate for Respondent 2 : Mr. D.S. Manorkar

¶46

CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA & R.N. LADDHA, JJ. DATED : 09/08/2021.

¶47

PER COURT :

¶48

. Writ Petition Nos. 3744/2021 and 3793/2021 are not on board. They are taken on board.

¶49

We have heard Mr. C.C. Deshpande, learned advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Manorkar, learned advocate for the respondent No. 2.

¶50

It is submitted that the respondent has filed application under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The petitioners also have remedy to file execution proceeding under section 37 of the said Act.

¶51

The stay has not been granted by the District Court where the application is pending. There would be no impediment to the petitioners to get the order executed in absence of the order of stay from the Court. The petitioners are at liberty to

¶52

WP No.3644/21 & Ors.

¶53

¶54

take appropriate steps.

¶55

In view of that, the writ petitions are disposed of. No

¶56

costs.

¶57

All contentions of the parties are kept open on

¶58

merits.

¶59

[ R.N. LADDHA, J. ] [S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.]

¶60

ssc/

Prashant Tarachand Chitodkar v. Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prashant Tarachand Chitodkar v. Union of India and Others

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

Shree Prabhakar Ramchandra Dixit Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Arati Sharad Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Pratik Sanjay Surwase Vs v J Pawara

Balaji Vishwanath Kante Vs State of Maha and Ors.

Mahesh Krushnarao Ghugari Vs the Union of India and Others

Satish Balkrishna Joshi Vs Union of India and Others