Disposed¶27

Crescendo Ventures Private Limited v. M/s Niyaz Enterprises

Bombay HC6 Mar 2026CARAP/7/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996; appointment of sole arbitrator; prima facie existence of arbitration agreement; arbitration clause not disputed by respondent; Commercial Arbitration Application No. 7 of 2026; Bombay High Court; Sandeep V. Marne J.; Service Agreement dated 17 February 2024; Megha Chandra sole arbitrator; disclosure under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1); Bombay High Court (Fee Payable to Arbitrators) Rules 2018; costs borne equally; merits left open to Arbitral Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Ms. Megha Chandra, Advocate, as sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes and differences between the parties arising out of the Service Agreement dated 17 February 2024. ¶27

Crescendo Ventures Private Limited vs M/s Niyaz Enterprises — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appointment of Ms. Megha Chandra, Advocate, as sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes and differences between the parties arising out of the Service Agreement dated 17 February 2024.

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether an arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for resolution of disputes and differences between the parties arising out of the Service Agreement dated 17 February 2024.

¶11

Court's answer

The Respondent's learned counsel did not dispute the existence of the arbitration clause in the Service Agreement, and the Court recorded its satisfaction that an Arbitration Agreement prima facie exists between the parties.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

Ms. Megha Chandra, an Advocate of the Court, is appointed as sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties arising out of the Service Agreement dated 17 February 2024.

¶18

Key takeaways

All questions on merits are expressly left open to be agitated before the Arbitral Tribunal.ratio¶26
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 the order.ratio¶21
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, subject to the final Award.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Commercial Arbitration Application No. 7 of 2026 — Crescendo Ventures Private Limited v. M/s Niyaz Enterprises (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.; 17 April 2026): Application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an arbitrator for disputes arising out of a Service Agreement dated 17 February 2024. Respondent's counsel fairly did not dispute the existence of the arbitration clause, and the Court was satisfied of the prima facie existence of the Arbitration Agreement. Ms. Megha Chandra, Advocate, was appointed sole Arbitrator; a copy of the order to be communicated to her within one week; statutory Statement of Disclosure under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) to be forwarded to the parties within two weeks; arbitrator's fees as prescribed under the Bombay High Court (Fee Payable to Arbitrators) Rules, 2018, with arbitral costs and fees borne by the parties in equal portion, subject to the final Award; all questions on merits expressly left open to the Arbitral Tribunal; Application disposed of.

¶1

Renuka 33-CARAP-7-2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. 7 OF 2026

¶3

Crescendo Ventures Private Limited

¶4

...Applicant

¶5

V/s.

¶6

M/s Niyaz Enterprises ...Respondent

¶7

Mr. Yash Jain with Ms. Aishwarya Oarab i/b Mr. Pratyush Ranjan for Petitioner.

¶8

Mr. Rajuram Kukria with mr. Fazal Shaikh and Mr. Archit Shukla i/b Mr. Ahmad Ali Khan for Respondent.

¶9

CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATED: 17 APRIL 2026.

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

This is an Application filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ( the Arbitration Act ) for appointment of arbitrator for resolution of disputes and differences between the parties arising out of Service Agreement dated 17 February 2024.

¶12

Mr. Kukria, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent fairly does not dispute the existence of Arbitration clause in the Service

¶13

Page No.1 of 3

¶14

17 APRIL 2026

¶15

Renuka 33-CARAP-7-2026

¶16

Agreement. This court is also satisfied of prima facie existence of Arbitration Agreement between the parties.

¶17

In that view of the matter, I proceed to pass the following order:-

¶18

(A) Ms. Megha Chandra, an Advocate of this Court is appointed as sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties arising out of Service Agreement dated 17 February 2024. The contact details of the Arbitrator are as under :

¶19

Office Address	: Office No. 2, 2nd Building, Horniman Mumbai- 400 001	i Floor, 11/13 Botawala Circle Garden, Fort,
Email id	: megha.chandra88@	gmail.com
Contact No.	9372590230

¶20

(B) 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.

¶21

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

¶22

Page No.2 of 3 17 APRIL 2026

¶23

Renuka 33-CARAP-7-2026

¶24

(D) The parties shall appear before the learned sole Arbitrator on such date and at such place as indicated by her, 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.

¶25

(E) 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.

¶26

1. All questions on merits are expressly left open to be agitated before the Arbitral Tribunal.

¶27

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

¶28

[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]

¶29

Page No.3 of 3 17 APRIL 2026

Crescendo Ventures Private Limited v. M/s Niyaz Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Crescendo Ventures Private Limited v. M/s Niyaz Enterprises

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

Bombay Potteries and Tiles Ltd. vs Mazdoor Congress

Iifl Finance Limited vs Tirupati Overseas

Iifl Finance Limited vs Aqua Zoo Aqua Systems

Vineet Kamal Kedia vs Vaibhav Kamal Kedia

Vineet Kamal Kedia vs Kamaladevi Kedia

Devraj Kashivel Chettiar vs Paul Kevin Joseph Christopher