Bombay High Court

DATTATRAY SURESH RUPANWAR AND ANR.versusM/S. SANY HEAVY INSTRUTRY INDIA PVT.LTD. THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER

Decided: 20 February 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

Holding

The appeal is disposed of without merits, with the matters left to the arbitral tribunal for appropriate interlocutory measures.

Summary

The appellants filed an appeal under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, challenging an earlier order. While the appeal was pending, an arbitral tribunal was constituted under Section 11 and subsequently seized of an application under Section 17. The parties agreed that the tribunal would continue the proceedings. The court, without expressing any view on the merits of the appeal, ordered that the matter be left to the arbitral tribunal for appropriate interlocutory measures and disposed of the appeal. Consequently, any interim application also stands disposed, and the court’s order will be effected upon posting on its website.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate forum for deciding the matters raised in the appeal once an arbitral tribunal has been constituted under Section 17?
Whether the court should adjudicate the appeal under Section 9 or defer to the arbitral tribunal.

Legislation cited

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — s. 11, 17, 9

Subjects

Arbitration
Section 9
Section 11
Section 17
Interim application
Jurisdiction
Appeal disposal

Judgment

                                                      7-ara-8-25 with ia Final.doc



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                     ARBITRATION APPEAL NO. 8 OF 2025
                                    WITH
                 INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3118 OF 2025
                                      IN
                     ARBITRATION APPEAL NO. 8 OF 2025

 Dattatray Suresh Rupanwar and Anr.                      … Appellants
            Versus
 M/s. Sany Heavy Instrutry India Pvt. Ltd.               …Respondent
 Through its Authorised Officer



     Mr. Pratik Sabrad a/w Ashay Rabade i/by Mohan Vishnu, for the
     Appellants
     Ms. Bijal K. Gogri i/by GNP Legal, for the Respondent.


                       CORAM      : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.
                       DATE       : FEBRUARY 20, 2026

ORDER :

1.            This is an Appeal challenging an order passed under Section

9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ( “the Act”). Even while

the Appeal has been pending, in disposal of the Application under

Section 11 of the Act, a Learned Arbitral Tribunal has already been

constituted. The parties have consensus on treating these proceedings

as continuing proceedings under Section 17 of the Act before the
                                  Page 1 of 2
                               February 20, 2026
MPBalekar
                                                       7-ara-8-25 with ia Final.doc



Learned Arbitral Tribunal which is already said to be seized of an

Application under Section 17 of the Act.


2.          In these circumstances, without expression of an opinion on

merits of this Appeal or the order impugned, leaving it entirely to the

Learned Arbitral Tribunal to direct such appropriate interlocutory

measures as it deems fit, this Appeal is finally disposed of.


3.          In view of disposal of the Arbitration Appeal, Interim

Application, if any, stands disposed of.


4.          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 2 of 2
                              February 20, 2026
MPBalekar

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…