Mahendraprasad Kedarnath Dubey vs Lotus Logistics and Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Respondent No.2 is served and affidavit of private service is tendered. However, none appears for Respondent No.2. The Applicant had executed Development Agreement with Respondent No.2, who has in turn assigned the rights under the Development Agreement in favour of Respondent No.1. In that view of the matter it appears that real contesting parties are Applicant and Respondent No.1.

¶16

Page No. 1 of 3

¶17

6 January 2026

¶18

Megha 25_arbap_275_2025.docx

¶19

Mr. Aman Anand, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1 submits that Respondent No.1 is willing to go for arbitration subject to all objections including that of jurisdiction, being kept open. The Applicant and Respondent No.1 have jointly agreed on the name of Mr. Monil Punjabi, an Advocate practising in this Court for being appointed as Arbitrator. Accordingly, with consent of the Applicant and Respondent No.1 following order is passed:

¶20

(A) Mr. Monil Punjabi, an Advocate of this Court is hereby appointed as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties under the Development Agreement dated 20 October 2011. The contact details of the Arbitrator are as under :

¶21

Office Address :-Chambers of Advocate Vishal Kanade, 103, Gundecha Chambers, 9 Nagindas Master Road, Fort, Mumbai-400023 Mobile: No.+91 9224426201 Email ID :- [email protected]

¶22

(B) A copy of this order be communicated to the learned sole Arbitrator by the Advocate for the Applicant within a period of one week from the date of uploading of this order. The Applicant shall provide the contact and communication particulars of the parties to the Arbitral Tribunal alongwith a copy of this order.

¶23

(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 Arbitration Act to the parties within a period of 2 weeks from receipt of a copy of this order.

¶24

Page No. 2 of 3

¶25

6 January 2026

¶26

Megha 25_arbap_275_2025.docx

¶27

(D) The parties shall appear before the learned sole Arbitrator on such date and at such place as indicated by him, to obtain appropriate direction 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 alongwith mobile and landline numbers of the respective Advocates of the parties to the Arbitral Tribunal. Communication to such email addresses shall constitute valid service of correspondence in connection with the arbitration.

¶28

(E) The sole Arbitrator shall be entitled to the fees prescribed under the Bombay High Court (Fee Payable to Arbitrators) Rules, 2018 and the arbitral costs and fees of the Arbitrator shall be borne by the parties in equal portion and shall be subject to the final Award that may be passed by the Tribunal

¶29

All issues on merits are expressly kept open to be agitated before the Arbitral Tribunal appointed as above.

¶30

With the above directions, the Application is allowed and disposed of.

¶31

[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]

¶32

Signed by: Megha S. Parab Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 07/01/2026 20:27:00

¶33

Page No. 3 of 3 6 January 2026

Mahendraprasad Kedarnath Dubey v. Lotus Logistics and Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendraprasad Kedarnath Dubey v. Lotus Logistics and Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Tata Capital Housing Finance Ltd. vs Sanyog Kumar

Apsara Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. vs Vijay Shankar Singh

Vayudoot Multi Services Pvt. Ltd. vs Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Ltd.

Kamal R Bulchandani vs Central Depository Services India Ltd.

Rajul Haresh Mehta vs Phoenix Mills Limited

Ketan Lalit Shah Karta of Lalit Popatlal Shah HUF vs Central Depository Services India Ltd.