Disposed

Satish Ambe v. a B Construction

Bombay HC24 Jan 2025ARBAP/341/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought appointment of a sole arbitrator under Section 11 for disputes under a Memorandum of Understanding and interim relief under Section 9; respondent did not appear despite notice of the invocation and proceedings. The court found a validly invoked arbitration agreement, appointed Shyam Kapadia as sole arbitrator, converted ad-interim relief into interim relief, transferred the Secti

What the court decided

AI extract

Satish Ambe vs a B Construction — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

61-ARBAP-341-2024-corrected.doc

¶2

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

¶3

Digitally signed by SHRADDHA SHRADDHA KAMLESH KAMLESH TALEKAR TALEKAR Date: 2025.02.10 21:42:28 +0530

¶4

ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. 341 of 2024 WITH

¶5

ARBITRATION PETITION (LODG.) NO. 31512 OF 2024

¶6

SATISH AMBE ….Applicant/Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

A B CONSTRUCTION A.B. Construction Through its Proprietor Balkrishna Anant Kelambekar & Anr. ….Respondents

¶9

Ms. Vishal C. Ghosalkar , for Applicant/Petitioner.

¶10

CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

¶11

Date : January 24, 2025

¶12

P. C.

¶13

Arbitration Application No. 341 of 2024 us an Application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“ the Act ”), while Arbitration Petition (L.) No. 31512 of 2024 is a Petition under Section 9 of the Act. The Petitioner seeks to refer disputes and differences between the parties arising the Memorandum of Understanding dated October 14, 2017 (“ Agreement ”) executed with the Respondent and issued an invocation notice on September 30, 20224 to which there is no reply at all. It is seen from the record that not only the invocation notice served on the Respondent, but also

¶14

Page 1 of 4

¶15

January 24, 2025 Shraddha ** Corrected as per Order dated February 4, 2025

¶16

61-ARBAP-341-2024-corrected.doc

¶17

notice of these proceedings being listed today and the grant of ad-interim under the Section 9 Petition by order dated January 14, 2025 has also been intimated to the Respondent. Yet, none appears for the Respondent even today.

¶18

In these circumstances, being satisfied that an arbitration agreement is indeed in existence, and that it has been validly invoked, I see no fruitful purpose in keeping these proceedings pending further in this Court. Consequently, both the Application under Section 11 is hereby finally disposed of in the following terms :

¶19

a. Mr. Shyam Kapadia, Learned Advocate of this Court (email : [email protected]) 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.

¶20

b. A copy of this Order shall be communicated to the Learned Sole Arbitrator by the Advocates for the Applicant within a period of one week from today. The Applicant shall provide the contact and communication particulars of the parties to the Arbitral Tribunal along with a copy of this Order;

¶21

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 Advocates for the Applicant so as to enable them to

¶22

Page 2 of 4

¶23

January 24, 2025 Shraddha ** Corrected as per Order dated February 4, 2025

¶24

61-ARBAP-341-2024-corrected.doc

¶25

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 Advocates for the Applicant to the Respondent;

¶26

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, 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;

¶27

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; and

¶28

As regards the Petition under section 9 of the Act, the ad-interim relief granted on the last occasion by order date January 14, 2025 is hereby converted into an interim relief and the Section 9 Petition shall be treated as an Application under Section 17 of the Act, to be considered by the Learned Arbitral Tribunal hereby appointed. It shall be open to the Learned Arbitral Tribunal to deal with the matter thereafter, including being free to add to

¶29

Page 3 of 4

¶30

January 24, 2025 Shraddha ** Corrected as per Order dated February 4, 2025

¶31

61-ARBAP-341-2024-corrected.doc

¶32

vary, modify or vacate the relief granted granted on such terms as it deems fit in accordance with the Act. With the aforesaid directions, both the Petition under Section 9, as well as the Application under Section 11 of the Act are hereby finally disposed of .

¶33

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.

¶34

[ SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.]

¶35

Page 4 of 4 January 24, 2025 Shraddha ** Corrected as per Order dated February 4, 2025

Satish Ambe v. a B Construction

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Satish Ambe v. a B Construction

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Manmohan Kapani vs Kapani Resorts Pvt. Ltd.

Aditya Birla Finance Limited vs Sanchaiti Hospital Pvt. Ltd.

Honour Lab Ltd. vs the New India Assurance Company Limited

Mahadhan AgriTech Limited vs Khurana Enterprises

Shiv Shakti Pvt. Ltd. vs the Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd

Nazir Ahmed Ibrahim Velaskar and 2 Ors. vs K P D I Industries Limited