Roy Construction Company vs Union of India and Ors — CARAP/285/2026
Case under Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 Section 11. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 07th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM020107932026
e-Filing Number
25-03-2026
Filing Number
CARAP/10793/2026
Filing Date
25-Mar-2026
Registration No
CARAP/285/2026
Registration Date
02-Jun-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. Marne
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. Marne
Bench Type
Single
Category
ARBITRATION ( 4 )
Sub-Category
APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS ( 1 )
Judicial Branch
Original
Decision Date
07-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OFF
Last updated 20-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Roy Construction Company
Adv. Mihir Suhas Raje
Respondent(s)
-
1.Union of India and Ors
-
2.Engineer in Chief
-
3.The Chief Engineer Navy Mumbai
-
4.Commander Works Engineer NW
-
5.Asst Garrison Engineer I ASVINI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
07-May-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. MarneView PDF
The Bombay High Court appointed Mr. Prabhakar Y. Deshmukh as sole arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from an MES Contract between Roy Construction Company and the Union of India, with both parties consenting to the appointment. The court directed the parties to submit a statutory disclosure statement and appear before the arbitrator for procedural directions, with arbitrator fees to be shared equally and subject to the tribunal's final award. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
07-May-2026
Arbp-For Hearing And Final Disposal U/S 11
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. Marne
-
05-May-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. MarneView PDF
-
05-May-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
17-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. MarneView PDF
-
25-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CARAP/285/2026
The Bombay High Court appointed Mr. Prabhakar Y. Deshmukh as sole arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from an MES Contract between Roy Construction Company and the Union of India, with both parties consenting to the appointment. The court directed the parties to submit a statutory disclosure statement and appear before the arbitrator for procedural directions, with arbitrator fees to be shared equally and subject to the tribunal's final award. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts