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) 1307

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MANISH PITALE
In the Matter Between : Neelkanth Mansions and Infrastructure Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Urban Infrastructure Trustees Limited – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Gaurav Joshi, Senior Advocate, Mr. Kazan Shroff, Mr. M. S. Federal, Mr. Murtuza Federal, Ms. Rashne Mulla-Feroze, Mr. Aaroha Kulkarni and Mr. Nikhil Jalan i/b. Federal & Company, Mr. Navroz Seervai, Senior Advocate a/w Mr.Aditya Bapat, Mr. Arup Pereira, Ms. Mumtaz Bandukwala, Mr. Sandeep Junnarkar and Mr. H. Bhati i/b Junnarkar and Associates, Mr. Shiraz Rustomjee, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Aditya Bapat, Mr. Arup Pereira, Ms. Mumtaz Bandukwala, Mr. Sandeep Junnarkar and Mr. H. Bhati i/b Junnarkar and Associates, Mr. Dinyar Madon, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. J. S. Kini a/w. Mr. Aum Kini i/b. Ms. Sapna Krishnappa, Mr. J.S. Kini a/w. Mr. Aum Kini i/b. Ms. Sapna Krishnappa.

Table of Content
1. maintaining arbitration proceedings under the arbitration act. (Para 2)
2. the distinction between an order and an award. (Para 3 , 4 , 6)
3. maintenance of ongoing arbitration despite challenges. (Para 10 , 17 , 19)
4. dismissal of petition as not maintainable. (Para 22 , 24)

Order :

MANISH PITALE, J.

1. The respondent No.1 (original claimant) has filed this application for deciding a preliminary issue regarding maintainability of arbitration petition filed under Sections 14, 15 and 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Arbitration Act”), with a further prayer for accepting the preliminary objection and dismissing the arbitration petition as not maintainable.

2. The arbitration petition challenges an order dated 07th May 2024, passed by the learned Arbitrator dismissing an application filed by the petitioners (original respondents before the Arbitrator) under Section 32 of the Arbitration Act. According to the petitioners herein, in the light of certain developments that took place during the pendency of the arbitration proceedings, it had become impossible to continue the said proceedings as per Section 32 (2)(c) of the Arbi

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