Back
BHARATI DANGRE
Ashwin Maganlal Savani – Appellant
Versus
Himadri Davda – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The present Application seek appointment of Sole Arbitrator in terms of a clause contained in the last Will and testament of Mr.Maganlal Savani, and the Applicant, being a surviving heir of Maganlal, allege that since the disputes have arisen with another surviving heir, the Respondent, an Arbitrator nominated in the Will, may be appointed for resolving them.
2. Heard Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud alongwith Juhi Valia for the Applicant and Mr.Mayur Khandeparkar alongwith Ativ Patel for the Respondent. The brief facts which could be gleaned from the Application as well as the Reply filed by the Respondent can be encapsulated in the following Paragraphs.
3. The Applicant and the Respondent are two surviving heirs of late Maganlal, who died on 25.05.2017, leaving behind his last Will and Testament dated 02.07.2016.
Under the Will, the Applicant was appointed as the Sole Executor and trustee of the estate. In the capacity as a Sole Executor of the Will, the Applicant applied for grant of Probate to the High Court of Bombay and the Respondent affirmed the Affidavit, agreeing to the grant of Probate, as a consequence of which, the High Court was pleased to grant Probate on 26.03.
No arbitration clause relating to dispute between the parties in not appointing appellant as stockist and claim of compensation towards loss of goodwill and reputation. High Court erred in proceeding....
The court established that an arbitration agreement can be inferred from the conduct of the parties and the documents exchanged, and that a signed delivery challan containing an arbitration clause co....
The court emphasized the importance of upholding arbitration agreements and referred to the judgment in Pravin Electricals Pvt. Ltd. vs. Galaxy Infra and Engineering Pvt. Ltd. to support the appointm....
The use of 'may' in arbitration agreements indicates optionality rather than obligation, requiring mutual consent for arbitration to be valid.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for an unequivocal and unambiguous consent by the parties to arbitrate, and the application of the prima facie test to determine th....
A party does not have to name an Arbitrator unless mutual consent exists, emphasizing the validity of the Trigger Notice in seeking arbitration and the appointment of a Sole Arbitrator.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
