Rafique Md. Husain Tinwala v. Abdul Rahim Suleman Ghaswala and 8 Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
Bombay High Court OOCJ order dated 20 January 2026 by Sandeep V. Marne, J., disposing Arbitration Application No.234 of 2025 with Arbitration Petition No.360 of 2025 and Interim Application (L) No.24610 of 2025 (file ref 2026:BHC-OS:1838; Megha 3_arbap_234_25 & arbp_360_25). Parties: Md. Rafique Md. Husain Tinwala v. Abdul Rahim Suleman Ghaswala and Ors. Counsel: Akash Rebello with Nadeem Sharma, Rajkumar Awasthi, Manish Tomar i/b Fayzan Khan. Key terms: Sections 9 and 11, Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996; Deed of Partnership dated 16 August 2005; arbitration clause No.12; appointment of sole arbitrator Ms. Savita S. Ganoo; Respondent Nos.7 to 9 impleadment left open; Section 17 conversion liberty; disclosure under Sections 11(8) and 12(1); Bombay High Court (Fee Payable to Arbitrators) Rules 2018; respondents' non-appearance on 8 and 17 January 2026.
What did the court decide?
Application and Petition disposed of with directions: Arbitral Tribunal constituted by appointing Ms. Savita S. Ganoo as Sole Arbitrator for disputes under the Deed of Partnership dated 16 August 2005; statutory disclosure statement under Sections 11(8) and 12(1) to be forwarded within two weeks; arbitrator fees per the Bombay High Court (Fee Payable to Arbitrators) Rules, 2018 borne equally by the parties subject to final award; liberty to convert Arbitration Petition No.360 of 2025 into Section 17 proceedings before the Tribunal; impleadment of Respondent Nos.7 to 9 left open to the Tribunal; all rights and contentions kept open; Interim Application (L) No.24610 of 2025 disposed of as nothing surviving.