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

2025 Supreme(Bom) 953

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ALOK ARADHE, SANDEEP V.MARNE
Ambit Urbanspace – Appellant
Versus
Poddar Apartment Co-operative Housing Society Limited – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Parties :Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar with Mr. Vikramjeet Garewal, Mr. Santosh Pathak, Mrs. Namita Natekar and Ms. Archana Karmokar i/b. Law Origin, for Appellant in Commercial Arbitration Appeal (L) No. 12585/2025 and for Respondent No. 1 in Commercial Arbitration Appeal (L) No. 16482/2025.
Mr. Ashish Kamat, Senior Advocate with Mrs. Pooja Kane and Mr. Jitendra Jain i/b. Mr. Yogesh N. Adhia, for Appellant in Commercial Arbitration Appeal (L) No.16482/2025 and for Respondent Nos. 2 and 4 in Commercial Arbitration Appeal (L) No.12585/2025.
Mr. Amogh Singh i/b. Mr. Nimish Lotlikar, for Respondent No.1 in Commercial Arbitration Appeal (L) No.12585/2025.
Mr. Vishawajit Sawant, Senior Advocate i/b. Mr. Narayan G. Samant, Mr. Sandeep V. Mahadik and Ms. Duhita D. Desai, for Respondent Nos. 5, 7 and 8 in Commercial Arbitration Appeal (L) No.12585/2025.
Ms. Duhita D. Desai with Mr. Sandeep V. Mahadik and Mr. Narayan G. Samant, for Respondent Nos. 3, 5 and 6 in Commercial Arbitration Appeal (L) No.16482/2025.

Table of Content
1. background and procedural history of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. significance of binding agreements and obligations under those agreements. (Para 7 , 36 , 39 , 40)
3. arguments from the parties regarding occupancy rights (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
4. legal considerations regarding interim measures under section 9 (Para 14 , 18 , 19 , 20)
5. judicial observations on the exercise of jurisdiction under section 9. (Para 15 , 16 , 17)
6. court's analysis of tenant obligations and redevelopment process (Para 21 , 22 , 23)
7. implications of the court's decision and directions given (Para 49 , 51)
8. final decision mandating the vacation of garages. (Para 53 , 54)

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep V. Marne, J.

1) These Appeals are filed challenging the judgment and order dated 1 April 2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing Commercial Arbitration Petition (L) No. 38696/2024 filed by the Appellant-Ambit Urbanspace under the provisions of Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) seeking interim measures for vacation of premises by Respondent Nos. 5 to 9 for the purpose of carrying out development process of the building in question.

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top