Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act allows for interim measures, and the court emphasized the need to follow the prescribed procedures and encouraged settlement through mediation.

ORDER :

SONIA GOKANI, J.

1. By way of the present petition the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 24.08.2022 passed by the Commercial Court, Ahmedabad (Rural), deciding the interim injunction application filed by the petitioner in Commercial CMA No.16 of 2022 along with the application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) which is marked at Exhibit 5.

1.1 By way of the impugned order the interim injunction application preferred by the petitioner has been rejected, on the ground that such order is erroneous and not sustainable under the law, the challenge is made. It is also the grievance of the petitioner that the principal reliefs sought by the petitioner have also been considered while passing the order impugned.

2. The petitioner is the company registered under the provisions of Companies Act and is engaged in the business of building, managing, running and operating multiplex theaters. It is operating as averred in the petition various multiplex across India. The petitioner is the original applicant in the proceedings before the Commercial Court. The respondent No.1 is a limited liability partnership registered under the provisions of Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008 and is the owner of property situated at Revenue Survey Nos.981/2/2 and 984/1 of the draft town planning scheme No.106 (Vastral + Ramol) at village Vastral, Taluka Vatva, Sub-District Ahmedabad 12 (Nikol) in District Ahmedabad.

3. The prayers sought for are as follow:

“10..

(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari or in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order and direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned Order dated 24.08.2022 (Annexure A) passed by the learned Commercial Court, Ahmedabad (Rural) below Exhibit 5 in Commercial CMA No.16 of 2022;

(B) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present Petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to stay the operation, implementation and execution of the impugned Order dated 24.08.2022 (Annexure A) passed by the learned Commercial Court, Ahmedabad (Rural) below Exhibit 5 in Commercial CMA No.16 of 2022;

(C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present Petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to restrain the Respondent or anybody claiming through him from dispossessing the Petitioner from the said property without due process of law and from interfering with the possession of the property by the Petitioner;

(D) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present Petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to restrain the Respondent creating any third party rights by dealing with the subject premises in any manner whatsoever and from implementing any agreement, if any, executed with any third party in relation to the subject premises.;

(E) Your Lordships may be pleased to grant adinterim ex-parte relief in terms of paragraph (B) to (D) above;

(F) Your Lordships may be pleased to pass any other and further order(s) as may be required in the interest of fairness, justice and equity.”

4. This Court on different dates passed different orders and also issued the notice. The newly proposed respondent is also before this Court. The petitioner is represented by the learned senior advocate, Mr.Parikh assisted by the learned advocate, Mr.Kunal Vyas with learned advocate, Mr.Devarsh Trivedi for Gandhi Law Associates. The respondent No.1 Kankubag Mall LLP is represented by the learned senior advocate, Mr.Mihir Thakore assisted by the learned advocate, Mr.A.H.Mohapatra. Learned advocate, Mr.Nandish Chudgar represents the proposed party with learned advocate, Ms.Nidhi Prajapati.

5. We have heard the learned senior advocate, Mr.Parikh assisted by learned advocate, Mr.Trivedi, he seeks to withdraw this petition with a view to prefer an appeal under Section 37 of the Act, where the request for converting seems difficult in wake of a huge requirement of recasting the petition in an appeal memo. While pe