Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Ltd. vs Trilok Chand and Company through Its Proprietor Trilok Chand Goyal

¶1

41-ARBAP-191-2024.docx

¶2

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

¶3

ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. 191 OF 2024

¶4

Digitally signed by SHRADDHA SHRADDHA KAMLESH KAMLESH TALEKAR TALEKAR Date: 2025.03.29 20:11:49 +0530

¶5

Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Limited

¶6

Services Limited … Applicant Versus Trilok Chand and Company & Ors. … Respondents

¶7

Mr. Zerick Dastur a/w. Mr. Khushil Shah and Ms. Jennifer Sanjana i/b Zerick Daastur, for Applicant. .

¶8

None for Respondents.

¶9

CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. Date : March 25, 2025

¶10

PC :

¶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 June 29, 2022. The arbitration agreement is contained in Clause 24.11 (found at Page 70 to 71 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

It is apparent from the record that the arbitration agreement was invoked by Applicant on July 16, 2024, to which the Respondents have not filed any reply. The Respondents have not entered appearance

¶13

Page 1 of 4

¶14

March 25, 2025

¶15

41-ARBAP-191-2024.docx

¶16

till date. It is seen from the affidavit of service dated March 11, 2025 that service has indeed been completed.

¶17

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 decisions of 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.

¶18

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 October 19, 2022 to arbitration by a Sole Arbitrator.

¶19

Arbitration Petition No. 253 of 2024 (“ Section 9 Petition ”) relates to the very same matter between the very same parties, seeking certain interlocutory protective reliefs. The Section 9 Petition shall be treated as an Application under Section 17 of the Act by the arbitral tribunal appointed hereby. Given the efflux of time, the Petitioner is at liberty to modify or mould the contents of Section 9 Petition for its consideration as a Section 17 Application.

¶20

1 In Re: Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements Under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 & Stamp Act, 1899 – (2024) 6 SCC 1

¶21

2 SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Krish Spinning – 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1754

¶22

3 Ajay Madhusudan Patel v. Jyotrindra S. Patel – 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2597

¶23

Page 2 of 4

¶24

March 25, 2025

¶25

Shraddha

¶26

41-ARBAP-191-2024.docx

¶27

In these circumstances, both this Application as well as the Section 9 Petition are hereby finally disposed of , in terms of the following order:

¶28

A] The disputes and differences covered by this Application is hereby referred to the Mumbai Centre for International Arbitration (https://mcia.org.in), in terms of its Institutional Arbitration Rules, to appoint an appropriate arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties arising out of and in connection with the Agreement referred to above;

¶29

B] A copy of this Order will be communicated to the Mumbai Centre for International Arbitration by the Advocates for the Applicant 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 Centre along with a copy of this Order;

¶30

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 file the same in the Registry of this Court. The Registry of this Court shall retain the said Statement on the file of this Applicant and a copy of the same shall be furnished by the Advocates for the Applicant to the Respondents;

Page 3 of 4

March 25, 2025

Shraddha

41-ARBAP-191-2024.docx

¶35

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;

¶36

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.

¶37

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.

¶38

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.

¶39

[ SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.]

¶40

Page 4 of 4

¶41

March 25, 2025

¶42

Shraddha

Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Ltd. v. Trilok Chand and Company through Its Proprietor Trilok Chand Goyal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Ltd. v. Trilok Chand and Company through Its Proprietor Trilok Chand Goyal

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

Amit Engineers vs Union of India the General Manager and Anr.

Jaswant and Co. vs Union of India through Its the General Manager and Anr.

Gamisons and Barvadiya Realty Private Limited vs the Pant Nagar Vidya Darshan Co-Operative Housing Society Limited

Punjab National Bank vs Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited

Shiwalaya Amgaon Highways Pvt. Ltd. vs the Government of Maharashtra

Rajan Garg vs Cupino Limited