The Court disposed of an arbitration petition regarding the appointment of arbitrators. Having verified that disclosed consent was communicated to the Registrar, the Court found no further issue and concluded the proceeding.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
6_ARP65_21.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.65 OF 2021
M/s. Vidarbha Infotech Pvt. Ltd. through its Authorized Signatory Preeti Hemant Lanjekar … Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra through Joint Commissioner of Police (Traffic) … Respondent
Mr. Anup Lohiya and Mr. Pankaj Purway for Petitioner. Ms. Tanaya Goswami, AGP for Respondent-State.
CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J. DATE : DECEMBER 07, 2022
P.C. :
. By order dated 19.10.2022, this Court had appointed two former Judges of this Court as learned arbitrators and they were to appoint the presiding arbitrator. Learned counsel for the petitioner informs this Court that both the learned arbitrators have already communicated their consent and disclosure statement to the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court and that the learned presiding arbitrator has also done so.
(MANISH PITALE, J.)
Minal Parab
1/1
M/s. Vidarbha Infotech Pvt. Ltd.
State of Maharashtra
Manish Pitale
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
