Bombay High Court
GUNVANTI RAMESH SHAHversusNINE GLOBE BUILDERS
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- ARIF S DOCTOR
Holding
The court held that, despite the absence of certain respondents, it could appoint a sole arbitrator because the principal respondent firm consented, and the arbitration clause was enforceable under the Act.
Summary
The petitioners, Gunvanti R. Shah & Ors., filed a commercial arbitration application seeking the appointment of an arbitrator under the arbitration clause in their Supplemental Deed of Development Agreement with the respondents, Nine Globe Builders & Ors. The clause mandates referral of disputes to a sole arbitrator in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. While Respondent No.1 consented to the appointment, Respondents Nos.2‑4 were absent, raising the question of whether the court could proceed. The court held that the absence of some respondents did not bar appointment, especially since the primary respondent firm had consented. Accordingly, the court appointed Mr. Janay Jain as sole arbitrator, directed him to file a disclosure affidavit, and converted the Section 9 application into a Section 17 application, disposing of both applications.
Issues considered
- Can the court appoint an arbitrator under the arbitration clause when some respondents are absent or non‑participating?
- Is the arbitration clause in the Supplemental Deed enforceable under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?
- May a Section 9 application be treated as an application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?
Legislation cited
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — s. 17, 9
Subjects
- arbitration
- appointment of arbitrator
- Section 9
- Section 17
- absent parties
- commercial arbitration
- arbitration clause
- Bombay High Court
Judgment
12& 27-carap8-24c.doc
vai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
VASANT ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ANANDRAO
IDHOL IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION
Digitally signed by
VASANT
ANANDRAO IDHOL
Date: 2026.01.30
COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.8 OF 2024
10:38:21 +0530
Gunvanti R. Shah & Ors. …Applicants
V/s.
Nine Globe Builders & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION NO.14 OF 2023
Gunvanti R. Shah & Ors. …Petitioners
V/s.
Nine Globe Builders & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr.Dhruva Gandhi with Mr.Chirag Hathiramani i/b Mr.Yogesh
Devnani for the Applicants / Petitioners.
Adv.Mehernaz Contractor i/b Bafna Law Associates for
Respondent Nos.1 and 3.
Ms.Pooja Yadav for the BMC – Respondent (through V.C.)
CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
DATE : 28TH JANUARY, 2026.
P.C. :-
1. The Applicants by way of this Application seeks
1/4
12& 27-carap8-24c.doc
appointment of an Arbitrator. The disputes and differences that
have arises are out of the Deed of Development Agreement and
Deed of Supplement to Development Agreement. Learned
counsel points out that the arbitration clause is contained in
Clause No.14 of the Supplemental Deed, which reads thus :-
“14. Any dispute or difference arising
between the parties out of this Agreement or any
terms and conditions of this Agreement shall, if not
settled by agreement, be referred to the arbitral
tribunal consisting of sole arbitrator, in accordance
with the provisions of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996.”
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Respondents does not dispute the execution of the agreement nor
the arbitration clause.
3. Learned counsel points out that by an order dated 26 th
March, 2024, notice was issued to the Respondents. He submits
that all the Respondents have been served pursuant to the said
notice. The report records this. In any view, learned counsel
submits that Respondent Nos.2 to 4 are partners of the first
2/4
12& 27-carap8-24c.doc
Respondent Firm and the agreements in question have been
entered into by the first Respondent Firm in the usual course of
business and given that Respondent No.1 Firm is today
represented and is not opposing the appointment of an Arbitrator.
The fact that Respondent Nos.2 and 4 are not present, should not
detain the Court from proceeding to appoint an Arbitrator.
Having due regard to the submissions made and having noted that
the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1 has consented
to the appointment of an Arbitrator, I appoint Mr.Janay Jain, as
the Sole Arbitrator. The details of Mr.Janay Jain are as follows :-
Mr.Janay Jain,
Address : 4th Floor, Gundecha Chambers,
Nagindas Master Road, Fort, Mumbai,
Email ID : [email protected],
Mobile No.98209 92156.
4. Learned Arbitrator shall file disclosure affidavit within
one week.
5. Section 9 Application bearing Commercial Arbitration
Application No.14 of 2023 shall be converted and treated as an
Application under Section 17 of the Arbitration & Conciliation
3/4
12& 27-carap8-24c.doc
Act.
6. Both Applications are disposed off in the aforesaid
terms.
(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.)
4/4
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.