Bombay High Court

SUNIL MADHAVDAS AHUJAversusDEEPAK RAHEJA

Decided: 3 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed off as Withdrawn

Holding

The Court held that the petitioner may withdraw the petition and is at liberty to file a fresh application if the Supreme Court decision is favourable.

Summary

The petitioner, Sayali Deepak Upasani, filed a commercial arbitration petition seeking permission to withdraw the case pending a decision of the Supreme Court. The petitioner requested liberty to file a fresh application if the Supreme Court ruled in its favour. The sole issue before the High Court was whether such withdrawal could be permitted. The Court, after hearing the counsel, granted the petitioner's request, allowing the withdrawal and conferring liberty to re‑file. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the arbitration petition pending a Supreme Court decision
Whether the petitioner can be given liberty to file a fresh application after withdrawal

Subjects

Arbitration
Petition withdrawal
High Court
Commercial Division

Judgment

                                                                         32-CARBP-249-25.doc



                                                                                  Sayali



                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                                   IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION

                        COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 249 OF 2025
SAYALI
DEEPAK             Sunil Madhavdas Ahuja                           … Petitioner
UPASANI
                             V/s.
Digitally signed
by SAYALI
                   Deepak Raheja                                   … Respondents
DEEPAK
UPASANI
Date: 2026.09.03
17:53:11 +0530     Mr. Shanay Shah with Ms. Samiksha P. Rajput and
                   Mr. Kaushal T. i/b Lexicon Law Partners, for
                   Petitioner.
                   Mr. Ajinkya Jaibhave with Nidhi K. for Respondent
                   no. 2.
                   Harish Ballani i/b Joby Mahtew and Associates, for
                   Respondent nos. 1, 4 to 7.


                                                CORAM      : AMIT BORKAR, J.

                                                DATED      : SEPTEMBER 03, 2026
                   P.C.:

                   1.      The learned Advocate for the petitioner, on instructions,
                   seeks permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a
                   fresh application in case the decision of the Supreme Court is in
                   favour of the petitioner.

                   2.      Permission is granted as prayed for.

                   3.      The petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

                                                                  (AMIT BORKAR, J.)



                                                     1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.