Disposed¶22

Av Ventures Limited v. August Jewellery Private Limited

Bombay HC2 Jul 2025CARBP/604/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Section 9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996; interim relief; security deposit; fixed deposit; lien; Prothonotary and Senior Master; admitted liability; investment banking advisory fees; cash crunch; capital infusion; Section 11 application; Commercial Arbitration Petition (L) 17434 of 2025; Bombay High Court Commercial Division; Somasekhar Sundaresan J; AV Ventures Limited v. August Jewellery Private Limited & Ors.

What did the court decide?

Interim relief: Respondents directed to deposit Rs. 50 lakhs in a Fixed Deposit within two weeks of upload of the order, with a lien marked in favour of the Prothonotary and Senior Master; compliance to be reported when the matter stands over to July 30, 2025; Petitioner expected to file a Section 11 application to be tagged with this Petition. ¶22

Av Ventures Limited vs August Jewellery Private Limited — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether interlocutory reliefs should be granted under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against the Respondents, who admittedly owe approximately Rs. 51.5 lakhs to the Petitioner towards investment banking advisory fees. +1 more

¶13

Court's answer

There is an admitted liability of approximately Rs. 51.5 lakhs payable by the Respondents to the Petitioner; the obligation to pay has not been denied, though the Respondents plead cash constraints and point to a pending capital-infusion transaction.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

As an interim measure, the Respondents are directed to deposit Rs. 50 lakhs in a Fixed Deposit within two weeks from the date of upload of the order and mark a lien in favour of the Prothonotary and Senior Master of the Court, reporting compliance on the next date.

¶22

Key takeaways

Case-management direction: arbitration having been invoked in May 2025 and more than thirty days having elapsed, the Petitioner is expected to file a Section 11 application, which shall be tagged with this Petition on the next date.obiter¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

AV Ventures Limited v. August Jewellery Private Limited & Ors — High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Commercial Division (Somasekhar Sundaresan, J.), July 2, 2025. Section 9, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 petition seeking interlocutory reliefs in respect of an admitted debt of approximately Rs. 51.5 lakhs towards investment banking advisory fees. The Respondents did not deny the liability but pleaded cash constraints, relying on a capital-infusion transaction said to be underway. None appeared despite service. As an interim measure, the Respondents were directed to deposit Rs. 50 lakhs in a Fixed Deposit within two weeks of upload of the order, marking a lien in favour of the Prothonotary and Senior Master, and to report compliance on July 30, 2025. The Court noted arbitration had been invoked in May 2025 and expected the Petitioner to file a Section 11 application, to be tagged with this Petition.

¶1

511-CARBPL-17434-2025.doc

¶2

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

¶3

COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO. 17434 OF 2025

AV Ventures Limited

…Petitioner

Versus

August Jewellery Private Limited & Ors

¶8

…Respondents

¶9

Mr. Anurag Katarki, i/b Chirag Gupta, Alpha Partners, for the Petitioner.

¶10

None for Respondents.

¶11

CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. DATE : JULY 2, 2025

¶12

PC :

¶13

This is a Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking interlocutory reliefs against the Respondents, who admittedly owes a sum of approximately Rs.51.5 lakhs to the Petitioner towards fees for investment banking advise. It is the case of the Petitioner that the Petitioner had introduced significant equity investment into the Respondents and is owed fees for such advisory work.

¶14

A plain reading of the record would show that the obligation

¶15

ASHWINI JANARDAN VALLAKATI Digitally signed by ASHWINI JANARDAN VALLAKATI Date: 2025.07.08 16:09:16 +0530

¶16

to pay the Petitioner has not been denied by the Respondents. It is the

¶17

Page 1 of 3 July 2, 2025

¶18

Ashwini Vallakati

¶19

511-CARBPL-17434-2025.doc

¶20

Respondents’ case that there is a transaction that is currently underway to bail out the Respondents from its cash crunch, which would lead to the Petitioner being paid.

¶21

Consequently, it is apparent that there is an admitted liability but the Respondents have expressed their inability to pay claiming to have cash constraints. They have also stated that they would be closing a transaction for infusion of capital, which would then lead to them being able to pay the Petitioner.

¶22

Despite service, none appears for the Respondent today. While the Respondents is given one more opportunity to present itself on the next date, in the interregnum, the Respondents shall deposit a sum of Rs.50 lakhs in a Fixed Deposit within a period of two weeks from the date of upload of this order and mark a lien in favour of the Prothonotary and Senior Master of this Court. Compliance of the same shall be reported to this Court on the next date. Stand over to July 30, 2025.

¶23

It is also apparent that arbitration has been invoked way back in May 2025. The Petitioner would be expected to file an appropriate Application under Section 11 of the Act, since it is more than thirty days

¶24

Page 2 of 3 July 2, 2025

¶25

Ashwini Vallakati

¶26

511-CARBPL-17434-2025.doc

¶27

after invocation of arbitration. Once the Section 11 Application is filed,

¶28

the same shall be tagged with this Petition on the next date.

¶29