The High Court at Bombay accepted consent terms submitted by parties resolved a monetary dispute arising from an arbitral award and disposed of the appeal and cross-objection based on those terms.
Appeal and cross-objection dismissed on consent terms; terms taken on record and marked as Exhibit X.
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.
JPP
1
JYOTI PRAKASH PAWAR
Digitally signed by JYOTI PRAKASH PAWAR Date: 2023.07.05 11:16:45 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
APPEAL NO. 879 OF 2006 IN
ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 368 OF 2004
Kirti J. Shah … Appellant
V/s.
Harinarayan Bajaj ... Respondent
WITH CROSS OBJECTION (L) NO. 21 OF 2010 IN APPEAL NO. 879 OF 2006 IN ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 368 OF 2004
Harinarayan Bajaj … Petitioner
V/s.
Kirti J. Shah … Respondent
Mr. Simil Purohit with Vishal Pattabiraman i/b. M/s. Purohit & Co. for the Appellant/Petitioner
Ms. Sonal i/b. Vivek M. Sharma for the Respondent
CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR , ACJ & ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
DATE : 03 JULY 2023
JPP
2
P.C. :-
The matter is placed on board for filing consent terms. By order dated 26 June 2023, the Prothonotary and Senior Master was directed to depute an officer to examine whether the consent terms are in order as regards the signatures, etc.
JPP 3 4. APP 879.06.doc
provision of law neither they would be binding on the parties who are not signatories to the consent terms.
ARIF S. DOCTOR, J. ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
Harinarayan Bajaj
Kirti J. Shah
Nitin Jamdar
Arif S. Doctor
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
