Dismissed¶19

Bhavesh Bhanushali v. Mvk Properties Pvt. Ltd.

Bombay HC3 Nov 2025CARBP/867/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maintainability of a Section 37 challenge to rejection of a Section 16 application — held not amenable; challenge deferred to Section 34 stage against the final award; arbitration continuing before the Learned Arbitral Tribunal; Respondent No. 1 is the Org. Claimant; Bhavesh Bhanushali v. MVK Properties Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.; Bombay High Court Commercial Division, Somasekhar Sundaresan J., dismissed November 14, 2025.

What did the court decide?

An order rejecting an Application under Section 16 of the Act is not amenable to the scope of jurisdiction under Section 37 of the Act; accordingly, a petition seeking such a challenge is not maintainable. ¶14

Bhavesh Bhanushali vs Mvk Properties Pvt. Ltd. — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

905-CARBP-867-2025.doc

¶2

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

¶3

IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION

¶4

COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 867 OF 2025

¶5

Bhavesh Bhanushali …Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

MVK Properties Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. …Respondents

¶8

Mr. G.S. Hegde, Senior Counsel, a/w P.M. Bhansali, for the Petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Zibin Behramkamdin, Senior Counsel, a/w Sakshi Kashyap, i/b Kaizeen Mistry, for Respondent No.1/Org. Claimant.

¶10

CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. DATE : NOVEMBER 14, 2025

¶11

ORDER :

¶12

Heard the parties at some length. Having considered their submissions, what is writ large on the face of record is that the order impugned is rejection of an Application under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“ the Act ”) holding essentially, prima facie, that no jurisdictional question is present; and even the questions presented involve mixed questions of fact and law, which will require examination of further evidence.

¶13

Digitally signed by ASHWINI ASHWINI JANARDAN JANARDAN VALLAKATI VALLAKATI Date: 2025.11.17 14:17:16 +0530

¶14

Such an order is not amenable the scope of jurisdiction under

¶15

Section 37 of the Act.

¶16

Page 1 of 2 November 14, 2025

¶17

905-CARBP-867-2025.doc

¶18

Needless to say, Section 16 is explicit in its terms that a rejection of Application under Section 16 would not be amenable to a challenge and that it would indeed present a ground for consideration of a challenge under Section 34. Therefore, if and when the final award is challenged, the rejection of the Section 16 Application would be amenable to challenge.

¶19

In these circumstances, this Petition is dismissed as not being maintainable. Costs, if any, for this round of litigation shall be factored in by the Learned Arbitral Tribunal while assessing costs in the overall assessment of the matter.

¶20

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.

¶21

[ SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.]

¶22

Page 2 of 2 November 14, 2025

¶23

Ashwini Vallakati

Bhavesh Bhanushali v. Mvk Properties Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhavesh Bhanushali v. Mvk Properties Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Art by Cheraag Bamboat vs Heavy Chemicals Corporation

Tulsidas Khimji Warehousing Private Limited vs Vrutik Bhatt

Saraswathi Vidya Bhavan vs Tulsidal construction

D N Nagar Krishna Co. operative Housing Society Limited vs Ms Sai Siddhant Developers And Ors.

Satyan Finance Investment Ltd. vs Manjudevi Maheshkumar Goenka

Nearby Technologies Private Limited vs Uvik Technologies Private Limited