R F Constractors through Its Partner Mr. Mohammed Abdul Rauf vs the Hon Chairman Secretary Kailash Tower Co. Operative Housing Society Limited

¶1

29-ARBAP-337-2024 copy.docx

¶2

PURTI PRASAD PARAB Digitally signed by PURTI PRASAD PARAB Date: 2025.06.23 18:02:07 +0530

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. 337 OF 2024

¶5

R.F. Contractors …Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

The Hon. Chairman/Secretary Kailash Tower Co.operative Housing Society Limited …Respondent

¶8

Advocate for the Applicant appeared but appearance not tendered. None for the Respondent.

¶9

CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. DATE : JUNE 19, 2025

¶10

ORDER :

¶11

This Application has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ( “the Act” ) seeking appointment of an arbitrator in connection with disputes and differences that are said to have arisen between the parties under an Agreement dated March 2, 2022 ( “Agreement” ). The arbitration agreement is contained in Clause 30 of the Agreement (found at Page Nos.66 and 67 of the Application). In the interest of brevity, the arbitration agreement is not being extracted here. Suffice it to say that this matter falls within the jurisdiction of this Court.

¶12

Today, none appears for the Respondent. It can be seen from the affidavit in reply that the contention of the Respondent appears to be that the work carried out by the Applicant for which arbitration has been invoked was additional work and therefore would not be covered by the

¶13

Page 1 of 4 June 19, 2025

¶14

29-ARBAP-337-2024 copy.docx

¶15

arbitration agreement. This is not something that this court can look into and it is for the Respondent to seek appropriate rulings under Section 16 of the Act before the Arbitral Tribunal.

¶16

The scope of review under Section 11 is explicitly set out in Section 11(6A) of the Act. It is now trite law, with particular regard to the Supreme Court’s decision rendered by a seven-judge Bench in the Interplay Judgement¹ followed by multiple others, including SBI General² and Patel³ that the Section 11 Court ought not to venture beyond examining the existence of a validly existing arbitration agreement that has been formally executed. Even questions of existential substance is a matter that falls squarely in the domain of the arbitral tribunal, in view of Section 16 of the Act.

¶17

Being satisfied that an arbitration agreement is validly in existence, and that arbitration has been duly invoked, it is in the fitness of things to refer the disputes and differences between the parties in connection with the aforesaid Agreement dated March 2, 2022 to arbitration by a Sole Arbitrator.

¶18

In these circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by keeping this matter pending any further on the docket of this Court. The

¶19

1 In Re: Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Stamp Act, 1899 - (2024) 6 SCC 1

¶20

2 SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Krish Spinning - 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1754

¶21

3 Ajay Madhusudan Patel Vs. Jyotrindra S. Patel - 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2597

Page 2 of 4

June 19, 2025

Purti Parab

29-ARBAP-337-2024 copy.docx

¶26

Application is finally disposed of in the following terms:-

¶27

A] Ms. Aneesa Cheema, Learned Advocate of this Court is hereby appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties arising out of and in connection with the Agreement referred to above;

¶28

Address : Aneesa Cheema

¶29

C/o. Mayur Khandeparkar, 102, 1^st Floor, Oval House, Old British Hotel Lane, Kala Ghoda, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001.

¶30

Email: [email protected]

¶31

B] A copy of this Order will be communicated to the Learned Sole Arbitrator by the Advocate for the Applicant within a period of one week from the date on which this order is uploaded on the website of this Court. The Applicant shall provide the contact and communication particulars of the parties to the Arbitral Tribunal along with a copy of this Order;

¶32

C] The Learned Sole Arbitrator is requested to forward the statutory Statement of Disclosure under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) of the Act to the Advocate for the Applicant so as to enable them to file the same in the Registry of this Court. The Registry of this Court shall retain the said Statement on the file of this Application and a copy of the same shall be furnished by the Advocate for the Applicant to the Respondent;

¶33

D] The parties shall appear before the Learned Sole Arbitrator on such date and at such place as indicated, to obtain appropriate directions with regard to conduct of the arbitration including fixing a schedule for pleadings, examination of witnesses, if any, schedule of hearings etc. At such meeting,

¶34

Page 3 of 4 June 19, 2025

¶35

Purti Parab

¶36

29-ARBAP-337-2024 copy.docx

¶37

the parties shall provide a valid and functional email address along with mobile and landline numbers of the respective Advocates of the parties to the Arbitral Tribunal. Communications to such email addresses shall constitute valid service of correspondence in connection with the arbitration;

¶38

E] All arbitral costs and fees of the Arbitral Tribunal shall be borne by the parties equally in the first instance, and shall be subject to any final Award that may be passed by the Tribunal in relation to costs.

¶39

Needless to say, nothing contained in this order is an expression of an opinion on merits of the matter or the relative strength of the parties. All issues on merits are expressly kept open to be agitated before the arbitral tribunal appointed hereby.

¶40

All actions required to be taken pursuant to this order shall be taken upon receipt of a downloaded copy as available on this Court’s website.

¶41

[ SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.]

¶42

Page 4 of 4 June 19, 2025

¶43

Purti Parab

R F Constractors through Its Partner Mr. Mohammed Abdul Rauf v. the Hon Chairman Secretary Kailash Tower Co. Operative Housing Society Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R F Constractors through Its Partner Mr. Mohammed Abdul Rauf v. the Hon Chairman Secretary Kailash Tower Co. Operative Housing Society Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Aditya Birla Housing Finance Limited vs Rise Projects Pvt. Ltd.

Saryu Dhirajlal Mayani and Anr. Partners of Manoj and Co. vs Manoj and Co. and 4 Ors.

Hariom Projects Pvt. Ltd. vs Military Engineer Services through Chief Engineer

Supreme Transport Organisation Pvt. Ltd. vs The New India Assurance Company Pvt. Ltd.

Ms East India Drums and Barrels Manufacturing Limited vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited

Aditya Birla Finance Limited vs Venture Supply Chain Pvt. Ltd.