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 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Vikas Goel vs Lodha Developers Limited on 6 March, 2026

2026:BHC-OS:5937

                                                                       907.ARBPL.33754.2025.doc


                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                                  ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

                                ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO.33754 OF 2025

               Deepak Vashdev Hemnani & Anr.                               ....Petitioners
                    Versus
               Macrotech Developers Limited                                ....Respondent

                                                 WITH
                                ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO.42495 OF 2025

               Vikas Goel & Anr.                                           ....Petitioners
                     Versus
               Lodha Developers Limited                                    ....Respondent


                     Mr. Dharam Jumani a/w. Munaf Virjee, Shruti Salian & Mithali
                     Shetty i/b. AMR Law, for Petitioners.

                     Mr. Chirag Kamdar a/w. Nanki Grewal, Manasi Joglekar,
                     Krishna Thakkar & Harsh Nandu i/b. Wadia Ghandy & Co., for
                     Respondent.


                                                   CORAM: SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

                                                   DATE   : MARCH 6, 2026
               ORDER :

1. The captioned Petitions are identically placed, in content and merits, with the Petitions that were disposed of by common judgment dated April 4, 2025, whereby certain interlocutory arrangements had been directed, to adjust equities and balance interests of the residents of Lodha Worli, developed by Macrotech Developers. Page 1 of 3

MARCH 6, 2026 Aarti Palkar ::: Uploaded on - 09/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 13/03/2026 21:48:29 :::

907.ARBPL.33754.2025.doc

2. By orders dated April 9, 2025 and May 9, 2025, further Petitions of identical nature were tagged with the arbitration proceedings that had already commenced.

3. Learned Advocates for the parties jointly submit that the captioned Petitions too fall in the very same class and category.

4. Learned Counsel for the parties also submit that they have consensus that before the Learned Arbitral Tribunal, one lead Statement of Claim and one lead Statement of Defence would represent all the proceedings that the Learned Arbitral Tribunal is currenty seized of. Therefore, they request that the same treatment be given to the captioned Petitions as well, with just a short supplementary pleading only to reflect the difference in fact pattern. The parties may request the Learned Arbitral Tribunal to permit minor modifications to their lead pleadings already made just to reflect the fact pattern in the captioned proceedings.

5. In these circumstances, the captioned Petitions are hereby finally disposed of, in the same manner as the Petitions referred to above have been disposed of, referring the disputes under the captioned proceedings to be joined and tagged with the ongoing arbitration proceedings.

Page 2 of 3

MARCH 6, 2026 Aarti Palkar ::: Uploaded on - 09/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 13/03/2026 21:48:29 :::

907.ARBPL.33754.2025.doc

6. 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.] Page 3 of 3 MARCH 6, 2026 Aarti Palkar ::: Uploaded on - 09/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 13/03/2026 21:48:29 :::