SHRI ASHOK HIRACHAND SHAH vs SHRI ASHOK KASHINATH PATIL — HCBM10166042026
Case under Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 Section 11. Status: For Hearing (Arbitration Petition U/S. 11). Next hearing: 30th April 2026.
CNR: HCBM010166042026
e-Filing Number
30-03-2026
Filing Number
ARP/9613/2026
Filing Date
02-Apr-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain
Bench Type
Single
Category
ARBITRATION ( 4 )
Sub-Category
APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS ( 1 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Last updated 28-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SHRI ASHOK HIRACHAND SHAH
Adv. Tukaram Shendge
Respondent(s)
-
1.SHRI ASHOK KASHINATH PATIL
Case History
-
30-Apr-2026
Next hearingPending
-
30-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal JainView PDF
Case Summary: The High Court of Bombay granted Ashok Hirachand Shah's Arbitration Petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, appointing Ms. Pinky M. Bhansali as Sole Arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from a property sale agreement dated 28 January 2012. The court directed both parties to bear arbitration costs equally and to appear before the arbitrator for procedural directions regarding pleadings, witness examination, and hearing schedules. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
30-Apr-2026
For Hearing (Arbitration Petition U/S. 11)
Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain
-
23-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal JainView PDF
-
23-Apr-2026
Fresh Matters Auto Listed
Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain
-
16-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal JainView PDF
-
16-Apr-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
02-Apr-2026
Case filed
Case Summary: The High Court of Bombay granted Ashok Hirachand Shah's Arbitration Petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, appointing Ms. Pinky M. Bhansali as Sole Arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from a property sale agreement dated 28 January 2012. The court directed both parties to bear arbitration costs equally and to appear before the arbitrator for procedural directions regarding pleadings, witness examination, and hearing schedules. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts