M/S. Bace India Llp Thr. Partner Prasad Sawant v. J K Hosing Devlopment Corporation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 218 OF 2025 M/S. Bace India Llp Through Partner Prasad Sawant & Anr

...Petitioners

Versus

J K Hosing Development Corporation

...Respondent

Mr. Purushottam G. Chavan, for the Petitioner. Mr. Pheroze Mehta, a/w P. Amin, i/b N.N. Amin & Co., for Respondent.

CORAM

: SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

DATE : DECEMBER 10, 2025 ORDER :

1.

This Petition 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 an agreement dated February 24, 2023 ("Agreement"). The arbitration agreement is contained in Clause 17 (found at Page 23 of the Petition). 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 Digitally signed by ASHWINI JANARDAN VALLAKATI Date:

2025.12.16 14:27:22 +0530 ASHWINI JANARDAN VALLAKATI was invoked by the Petitioner on April 4, 2025. A reply dated April 10,

2025 is filed to the said invocation.

3.

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 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. 4.

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 agreement to arbitration by a Sole Arbitrator.

5.

Learned Advocate for the Respondent has no quarrel with proceeding to arbitration but seeks to resolve the right to pursue an Application under Section 16 of the Act.

1 In Re: Interplay Between Arbitration Agreement under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Stamp Act, 1899 (2024) 6 SCC 1 2 SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Krish Spinning, 2024 SCC OnLine 1974 3 Ajay Madhusudan Patel Vs. Jyotindra S. Patel, 2024 SCC OnLine, 2597

6.

In these circumstances, this Petition is hereby finally disposed of, in terms of the following order: A) Mr. Yuvraj Narvankar. 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;

Email ID:

yuvraj.narvankar@yahoo.com B) A copy of this Order will be communicated to the Learned Sole Arbitrator by the Advocates for the Petitioner within a period of one week from the date of upload of this order. The Petitioner 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.]