SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Bom) 966

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
G.S. Kulkarni, J.
Relcon Infroprojects Ltd. & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
Ridhi Sidhi Sadan, Unit of Shree Ridhi Co. op. Housing Society Ltd. & Ors. – Respondents
Arbitration Petition (L) No. 12317 of 2022
Decided On : 15-07-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Karl Tamboly a/w. Akanksha Mishra, Jiu Rathod i/b. Dinanath
Tiwari
For the Respondent: Mr. Sarosh Bharucha a/w. Mr. Ameet Mehta, Ms. Jayashri Manjrekar, Ms. Smriti Pal i/b. M/s. Solicis Lex Mr. Anil D’souza a/w. Valentine Mascorenhas, Mr. Vaibhav Charalwar a/w. Ms. Shweta R. Rathod i/b. Elixir Legal Services, Mr. Udayan Jain

The decision upheld the majority members' right to redevelopment and emphasized the readiness for arbitration, allowing the Court to exercise jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Headnote:

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Interim Measures - Development Agreement - Society Redevelopment - [ARBITRATION] - [DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT] - [Section 9]

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, appointed as a developer by the Society, sought interim measures for possession of flats and to commence redevelopment. Respondent nos. 2, 3, 4, and 6 obstructed the redevelopment by not vacating their premises, contrary to the majority members' decision.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the majority members' decision to redevelop the building was obstructed by respondent nos. 2, 3, 4, and 6. The Court held that the minority members cannot obstruct the will of the majority members and directed them to vacate their premises for redevelopment.

Issues: Obstruction of redevelopment by minority members, readiness for arbitration, and possession of flats.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court upheld the majority members' decision for redevelopment and directed the minority members to vacate their premises. The Court also found that the readiness for arbitration was not an issue as the petitioners and the Society were willing to take the matter to arbitration.

Final Decision: The Court directed respondent nos. 2, 3, 4, and 6 to vacate their premises for redevelopment and appointed a Court Receiver to take appropriate action if they fail to vacate. The Court also kept the rights and contentions of respondent no. 6 and 5(a) and (b) open for inter se proceedings.

ORDER :

1. This is a petition filed under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 whereby the petitioner who has been appointed as a developer by respondent no.1-”Ridhi Sidhi Sadan, Unit of “Shree Ridhi Sidhi Cooperative Housing Society Ltd.” (for short “the Society”) is before the Court praying for the following interim measures pending the arbitral proceedings:

    “a) The respondent no. 1 and its members (respondent nos. 2 to 5 herein) and respondent no. 6 be ordered and directed to handover quiet, vacant and peaceful possession of their respective flats, i.e. Flat No. 13 (2nd floor) of respondent no. 2, Flat no. 19 (1st floor) of respondent no. 3 and Flat No. 28 (1st floor) of respondent no. 4 and Flat No. 14 (2nd floor) of the respondent nos. 5 and 6 to the petitioner on or before 03.05.2022 for the purpose of demolition and commencing and completing the redevelopment of the building of respondent no. 1.

b) The respondent nos. 2 to 5, their legal heirs, successors, servants, agents, authorized representatives, occupants etc. by an Order Direction of Injunction, be restrained from doing any act of Obstruction/Non-Cooperation, which shall amount jeopardizing the terms of the Development Agreement dated 11.12.2014 and Supplementary Development Agreement dated 29.11.2021 or any other acts which are contrary or coercive to the terms of the said Development Agreement dated 11.12.2014 and Supplementary Development Agreement dated 29.11.2021.

c) In the alternative to prayer clause (a) hereinabove, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to appoint any competent authority or grant rights to the petitioners and its representative to take physical possession of the individual flats of respondent no. 2 to 5 with the police assistance and in the presence of representative of the Society. In such an event, Hon’ble Court may please to order the petitioners to take custody of things/articles and belongings of respondent nos. 2 to 5 kept in their individual flats and shall keep the same at safe custody and storage maintained at site/or any other suitable place.

d) In the alternative to prayer clause (c) hereinabove, the Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay be appointed a Receiver in respect of the individual flats of respondent nos. 2 to 5 in the building of respondent no. 1 along with all the powers under Order XL Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in respect of the individual flats of respondent nos. 2 to 5, including the power to take quiet, vacant and peaceful physical possession of their respective flats, i.e., Flat No. 13 (2nd floor) of respondent no. 2, flat No. 19 (1st floor) of respondent no. 3 and Flat No. 28 (1st floor) of respondent no. 4 and Flat No. 14 (2nd floor) of respondent no. 5 and to the petitioner on or before 03.05.2022 with the police assistance and after making the complete inventory of all the articles lying therein to handover the same to the petitioner forthwith, for the purpose of demolition followed by commencing and completing the re-development project of the building of respondent no. 1.

e) Respondent nos. 2 to 5 be directed to execute their Individual Agreements (Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreements) with the petitioner, with respect to their respective flats, on the same terms and conditions as the Individual Agreements (Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreements) executed by other members of respondent no. 1, for the purpose of commencing and completing the redevelopment of the building of respondent no. 1.

f) In the alternative to prayer clause (d) hereinabove, the Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay be appointed a Receiver in respect of individual flats of respondent nos. 2 to 5 in the building of respondent no. 1 along with all the powers under Order XL Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in respect of the individual flats of respondent nos. 2 to 4, including the power to execute the Individual Agreements (Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreements) on behalf of each of respondent nos. 2

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

          Please visit our Training & Support
          Center or Contact Us for assistance

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon Back to top