Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 2]

Bombay High Court

Kalpesh Shantikumar Mehta And 4 Ors vs Nkgsb Co-Operative Bank Ltd. And Anr on 8 June, 2022

Author: G.S. Kulkarni

Bench: G.S. Kulkarni

                                              1                                  903-carbp 220-22

Prajakta Vartak
                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                             IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION
                  COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 220 OF 2022

         Mr. Kalpesh Shantikumar Mehta & Ors.                      ..Petitioners
                     Vs.
         NKGSB Co-op. Bank Ltd. & Anr.                             ..Respondents

                                      AND
                  COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 221 OF 2022

         KSM Multitrade LLP & Ors.                                 ..Petitioners
                    Vs.
         NKGSB Co-op. Bank Ltd. & Anr.                             ..Respondents
                                                  -----
         Mr. Anshul Anjarlekar i/b. Raval Shah & Company for Petitioners.
         Mr. B. B. Sharma i/b. Mr. Pavan Patil for Respondent No.2.
                                           -----

                                        CORAM :      G.S. KULKARNI, J.
                                        DATE :       JUNE 08, 2022.
         P.C.:

1. Leave to amend to implead the Commissioner for Co-operation and Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Maharashtra State, who is acting as a delegate of the Central Government under the provisions of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002, in regard to the appointment of an arbitral tribunal for adjudication of the disputes under the said Act.

2. Both these petitions filed under Sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, "the Act") were heard by this Court on 11 April, 2022. Respondent no.1 is the party to the arbitral proceedings and is the contesting party. Affidavit of service dated 05 April, 2022 was placed on record evidencing service on respondent no.1. However, respondent no.1 was not represented on 11 ::: Uploaded on - 08/06/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 10/06/2022 03:24:03 ::: 2 903-carbp 220-22 April, 2022 when this Court had heard the proceedings. Thereafter the petitions were listed on 18 April, 2022 when again respondent no.1 was not represented. In these circumstances, as a matter of last chance to respondent no.1 to appear in the present proceedings, stand over to 22 June, 2022.

3. Let the advocate for the petitioners issue a fresh notice to respondent no.1 who has its office at Girgaon, Mumbai. Also a physical service be effected on the competent officer of respondent no.1 informing respondent no.1 of the adjourned date of hearing. Let the affidavit of service be accordingly placed on record.

4. It is clarified that if despite service of notice respondent no.1 is not represented on the adjourned date of hearing, the Court shall proceed to hear learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for Union of India and pass appropriate orders.

5. The Law Officer of respondent no.1 is directed to appoint an advocate and if respondent no.1 does not desire to appoint an advocate, he shall personally remain present before the Court.

6. Let a copy of this order be also forwarded to respondent no.1 by learned advocate for the petitioner, for necessary compliance.

[G.S. KULKARNI, J.] ::: Uploaded on - 08/06/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 10/06/2022 03:24:03 :::