Aditya Birla Finance Limited v. Vinayak Kulkarni Huf Through Its Karta

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION APPLICATION (L) NO. 401 OF 2024 Digitally signed by SHRADDHA KAMLESH TALEKAR Date:

2025.07.21 16:13:03 +0530 SHRADDHA KAMLESH TALEKAR Aditya Birla Finance Limited ... Applicant Vs.

Vinayak Kulkarni HUF through its Karta & Ors.

.. Respondent(s) Mr. Vishal Maheshwari a/w. Ms. Kamini Pansare and Ms. Shrishty Punjabi i/b VM Legal, for Applicant.

Ms. Kavisha Shah i/b India Law Alliance, for Respondent Nos. 1, 3 4 and 5.

CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

Date : July 8, 2025 Order :

1.

This Application has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("the Act"), seeking appointment of an arbitrator in connection with disputes and differences that are said to have arisen between the parties under the Loan Agreements of various dated August 31, 2017, August 26, 2020 and January 3, 2023 ["Agreements"]. The arbitration agreement is contained in Clause 12(N) of the Agreement dated August 31, 2017 (found at Page 59 of the Application), Clause 32.17 of the Agreement dated August 26, 2020 (found at Page 100 of the Application) and Clause

32.17 of the Agreement dated January 3, 2023 (found at Page 141 of the Application). In the interest of brevity, the arbitration agreement is not being extracted here. Suffice it to say that this matter falls within the jurisdiction of this Court.

2.

It is apparent from the record that the arbitration agreement was invoked by the Applicant on June 17, 2024. There is no quarrel on the existence of the arbitration agreement. Although the two of the three Agreements entail arbitration in New Delhi, the parties have consensus on amending the arbitration agreement to confirm to the Court that the seat of the arbitration in respect of all three Agreements shall be at Mumbai. 3.

Liberty is granted to record the change of name of the Applicant before the Arbitral Tribunal.

4.

The scope of review under Section 11 is explicitly set out in Section 11(6A) of the Act. It is now trite law, with particular regard to the decisions of a seven-judge bench in the Interplay Judgement1 followed by multiple others, including SBI General2 and Patel3 that the Section 11 Court ought not to venture beyond examining the existence of a validly existing arbitration 1 In Re: Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements Under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 & Stamp Act, 1899 - (2024) 6 SCC 1 2 SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Krish Spinning - 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1754 3 Ajay Madhusudan Patel v. Jyotrindra S. Patel - 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2597

agreement that has been formally executed. Even questions of existential substance is a matter that falls squarely in the domain of the arbitral tribunal, in view of Section 16 of the Act.

5.

Being satisfied that an arbitration agreement is validly in existence, and that arbitration has been duly invoked, it is in the fitness of things to refer the disputes and differences between the parties in connection with the aforesaid Agreements to arbitration by a Sole Arbitrator. 6.

Taking consent of the parties to the identity of the arbitraror on board, the Application is finally disposed of in the following terms : A] Mr. Jehan Lalkaka, an advocate of this Court, is hereby appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties arising out of and in connection with the Agreement referred to above. The contact details are as under : Office Address:- Chambers of Senior Advocate Mr. Kevic Setalvad, Savla Chambers, 401, 4th floor, Fort, Mumbai 400001.

Email Id : lalkakajehan@gmail.com B] A copy of this Order will be communicated to the Learned Sole Arbitrator by the Advocates for the Applicant within a period of one week from the upload of this order on the website of this Court. The

Applicant shall provide the contact and communication particulars of the parties to the Arbitral Tribunal along with a copy of this Order; C] The Learned Sole Arbitrator is requested to forward the statutory Statement of Disclosure under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) of the Act to the parties within a period of two weeks from receipt of a copy of this Order;

D] The parties shall appear before the Learned Sole Arbitrator on such date and at such place as indicated, to obtain appropriate directions with regard to conduct of the arbitration including fixing a schedule for pleadings, examination of witnesses, if any, schedule of hearings etc. At such meeting, the parties shall provide a valid and functional email address along with mobile and landline numbers of the respective Advocates of the parties to the Arbitral Tribunal. Communications to such email addresses shall constitute valid service of correspondence in connection with the arbitration; E] All arbitral costs and fees of the Arbitral Tribunal shall be borne by the parties equally in the first instance, and shall be subject to any final Award that may be passed by the Tribunal in relation to costs. 7.

Needless to say, nothing contained in this order is an expression of an opinion on merits of the matter or the relative strength of the parties. All issues on merits are expressly kept open to be agitated before the arbitral tribunal appointed hereby.

8.

All actions required to be taken pursuant to this order, shall be taken upon receipt of a downloaded copy as available on this Court's website. [ SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.]