Mohan Singh Jagat Singh Dhami vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J
Mohan Singh Jagat Singh Dhami – Appellant
Versus
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms Bhavana A. Anklesaria
For the Respondents: Mr. Hemant Prabhulkar, Mr. Yogesh Bhoge, Mr. Shailendra S. Kanetkar

Table of Content
1. analysis of jurisdiction on arbitration matters. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. context and background of the parties involved. (Para 4 , 5 , 11)
3. details regarding the dealership and partnership matters. (Para 6 , 7 , 10)
4. challenges and claims affecting the nominal party. (Para 8 , 9)
5. court's reasoning regarding arbitration's jurisdiction. (Para 12 , 13 , 15)
6. final decision on the motion. (Para 16)

JUDGMENT:-

The Defendant No.2 has taken out this notice of motion under Order VII, Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code.

2. Mr. Kanetkar, the learned counsel for the Defendant No.2 contends that the dispute is predominantly between the Plaintiff and the Defendant No.2. He contends that based on the same cause of action as averred in this suit, the Plaintiff has initiated arbitration proceedings and that the said arbitration proceedings between the Plaintiff and the Defendant No.2 are pending before the learned arbitrator. He contends that the reliefs sought against the Defendant No.1 are ancillary and would be covered by the arbitral award. He therefore contends that the present suit is barred by law and hence, the plaint needs to be rejected.

3. Ms Bhavana Anklesaria, the lear

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

BOMBAY HIGH COURTSMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JMohan Singh Jagat Singh Dhami – AppellantVersusIndian Oil Corporation Ltd. – Respondent

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J
Mohan Singh Jagat Singh Dhami – Appellant
Versus
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. – Respondent