Vinod Vasanji Chheda vs The Raj Developers — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

Vinod Vasanji Chheda vs The Raj Developers — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal with Mr. Jamshed Master, Advocate, as sole Arbitrator; conversion of the Petition into an Application under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act to be decided by the Tribunal on its own merits; all rights and contentions of the parties kept open; Arbitrator's fees as prescribed under the Bombay High Court (Fee Payable to Arbitrators) Rules, 2018, borne by the parties in equal portion and subject to the final Award.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Petitioner seeking interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act should be relegated to the remedy under Section 17 of the Act through a constituted Arbitral Tribunal. +1 more

Court's answer

In view of the nature of prayers made in the Petition, it would be appropriate to constitute an Arbitral Tribunal and relegate the Petitioner to the remedy under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act instead of dealing with the Section 9 interim-measure prayers at that stage.

Ratio / Principle

Mr. Jamshed Master, an Advocate of the Court, is appointed sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties arising out of the Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreement.

Key takeaways

The present Petition is converted into an Application under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal on its own merits, with all rights and contentions of the parties expressly kept open.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Arbitration Petition No. 656 of 2025, decided 20 April 2026 by Justice Sandeep V. Marne. Vinod Vasanji Chheda filed a Section 9, Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 application seeking interim measures before commencement of arbitral proceedings against The Raj Developers and Ors., the dispute having arisen out of a Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreement dated 10 June 2023 (the operative order records the same agreement as dated 10 June 2013). Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 4 conceded the existence of an Arbitration Agreement, and both sides agreed to a sole-Arbitrator tribunal. The court held it appropriate to constitute an Arbitral Tribunal and relegate the Petitioner to the Section 17 remedy, appointing Mr. Jamshed Master, Advocate, as sole Arbitrator, directing statutory disclosure under Sections 11(8) and 12(1) within two weeks, fixing fees per the Bombay High Court (Fee Payable to Arbitrators) Rules 2018 to be borne equally subject to the final Award. The Petition was converted into a Section 17 Application, all rights and contentions were expressly kept open, and the Petition was disposed of.

Renuka 1-ARBP-656-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 656 OF 2025

Vinod Vasanji Chheda

...Petitioner

V/s.

The Raj Developers and Ors. ...Respondents

Mr. Bhavin Gada with Mr. Dhaval M. Visawadia i/b Mr. Harakhchand and Co., for Petitioner.

Mr. Anil Mishra with Mr. Rihen Mishra, for Respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 4.

CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATED: 20 APRIL 2026.

P.C.:

This is an Application filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ( the Arbitration Act ) seeking interim measures before commencement of the arbitral proceedings.

I have heard Mr. Gada, the learned counsel appearing for Petitioner and Mr. Mishra, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 4.

The disputes and differences have arisen out of Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreement dated 10 June 2023.

Page No.1 of 3 20 APRIL 2026

Renuka 1-ARBP-656-2025

As the hearing of the Petition progressed, Mr. Mishra, fairly agrees existence of Arbitration Agreement between the parties. Considering the nature of prayers made in the Petition, in my view it would be appropriate to constitute Arbitral Tribunal and to relegate the Petitioner to remedy under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act. Both the learned counsel have agreed for constitution of Arbitral Tribunal comprising of a sole Arbitrator.

I accordingly, proceed to pass the following order:(A) Mr. Jamshed Master, an Advocate of this Court is appointed as sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties arising out of Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreement dated 10 June 2013. The contact details of the Arbitrator are as under :

Office Address : Lentin Chambers, 1^st Floor, Dalal Street, Fort, Mumbai. Email id : [email protected] Contact No. 9820840010

A copy of this order be communicated to the learned sole Arbitrator by the Advocates 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.

Page No.2 of 3

20 APRIL 2026

Renuka 1-ARBP-656-2025

(B) 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 parties within a period of 2 weeks from receipt of a copy of this order.

(C) 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.

(D) The fees of the sole Arbitrator shall be as 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.

1. Present Petition is converted into Application under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal on its own merits.

1. All rights and contentions of the parties are expressly kept open to be agitated before the Arbitral Tribunal.

1. With the above directions, the Petition is disposed of.

[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]

Page No.3 of 3 20 APRIL 2026