R.D.DHANUKA
Meru Cab Company Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Sudhir Bhosale – Respondent
By these petitions filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (for short “the Arbitration Act”), the petitioner seeks an order of appointment of a Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay or any other fit or proper person as Receiver with a direction to take possession of the taxi described in prayer clause (b) of the petitions or any equipments installed in the taxi from the respondent and hand over the same to the petitioner and for injunction restraining the respondent from using or operating the said taxi or assigning, selling, transferring, alienating, leasing, licensing and/or creating any third party rights in respect of the said taxi and/or parting with the possession thereof in favour of any person other than the petitioner and/or its representatives. The petitioner also seeks mandatory order and injunction against the respondent to forthwith return the said taxi to the petitioner in good order and good working condition along with its equipments and accessories installed in the taxi. By consent of the parties, all these petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.
2. Learned counsel for the parties have addressed th
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.