Bombay High Court

RAJENDRAKUMAR MADANLAL SURANAversusSANGEETA KAILAS AGRAWAL AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: ARUN R PEDNEKER

Holding

The application for extension of mandate is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to file an appropriate application before the proper forum.

Summary

The petitioner, Rajendrakumar Madanlal Surana, filed a civil application seeking an extension of the arbitration mandate under section 29-A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The petitioner’s counsel argued that a recent Supreme Court judgment in Jagdeep Chowgule v. Sheela Chowgule (2026) indicated that the dispute should be heard by the District Court, rendering the present application unnecessary. Accordingly, the petitioner requested permission to withdraw the application and to file a suitable application before the appropriate forum. The Court examined the effect of the Supreme Court precedent on the jurisdiction of the High Court in arbitration matters. Finding no impediment to the withdrawal, the Court dismissed the application as withdrawn and granted liberty to file a fresh application before the proper forum. The order effectively closed the present proceeding without prejudice to future litigation in the correct jurisdiction.

Issues considered

Whether the civil application for extension of arbitration mandate under section 29‑A(4) can be withdrawn in light of a Supreme Court decision on jurisdiction.
Whether the matter should be transferred to the District Court as per the Supreme Court precedent.

Legislation cited

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — s. 29-A(4)

Subjects

Arbitration
Extension of mandate
Withdrawal of application
Jurisdiction
Section 29-A
Supreme Court precedent

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:9997

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

62 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 160 OF 2026
IN ARB/9/2023

RAJENDRAKUMAR MADANLAL SURANA
VERSUS
SANGEETA KAILAS AGRAWAL AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. A.P. Nahar h/f. Mr. Bhandari Anand P.
Advocate for Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr. H.A. Bajaj h/f. Mr. A.S. Bajaj
...

CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
Dated : March 09, 2026

PER COURT :-

1. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jagdeep Chowgule

Vs. Sheela Chowgule and others, 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 89, the matter

would lie before the District Court. In view of the same, the learned

counsel seeks leave of this Court to withdraw the present civil application

with liberty to file appropriate application before appropriate forum.

2. In view of the above, the application filed for extension of mandate

under section 29-A (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is

dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as prayed for.

( ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. )

ssc/

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…