SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
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.

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.

2) The developer-Ambit Urbanspace has filed Commercial Arbitration Appeal (L.) No.12585/2025 challenging the judgment and order dated 1 April 2025. Commercial Arbitration Appeal (L) No.16482/2025 is filed by original Respondent Nos.2 to 4 to the limited extent of some of the findings recorded by the learned Single Judge qua about tenancy rights of Respondent Nos. 5 to 8, even though there is no specific direction against them in the operative part of the impugned judgment and order.

3) A very brief factual narration of the case as a prologue to the judgment would be necessary. For ease of reference, throughout the judgment, parties are referred to by their description in the Commercia

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