Arbitration application where the court noted the notice invoking arbitration was not issued to the respondent company named in the application but to another company and four individuals, casting doubt on valid invocation of arbitration. Matter adjourned for counsel to take instructions.
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.
Digitally signed by MUGDHA MUGDHA MANOJ MANOJ PARANJAPE PARANJAPE Date: 2024.10.25 14:11:44 +0530
1 30-ARBAP 98-24.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.98 OF 2024
Hitesh Coal Traders … Applicant V/s. Mahabir Fine Arts Private Limited … Respondent
Mr. Sandeep Kumar i/by Rucha Jog for the Applicant.
CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J. DATE : 24TH OCTOBER 2024
P.C. :
Applicant to take instructions in the matter.
(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.)
Mugdha
1 of 1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether arbitration was validly invoked against Mahabir Fine Arts Private Limited when the notice named a different company and four individuals?
Hitesh Coal Traders
Mahabir Fine Arts Private Limited
Arif S. Doctor
As recorded by the court registry
5 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
