Earthen Roots Pvt Ltd YNA LEGAL LLP vs Vedant Innotech Pvt Ltd — CARBP/421/2026

Case under Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 Section 9. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 27th April 2026.

CNR: HCBM020114682026

CASE DISPOSED

e-Filing Number

30-03-2026

Filing Number

CARBP/11466/2026

Filing Date

30-03-2026

Registration No

CARBP/421/2026

Registration Date

22-05-2026

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP V. MARNE

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP V. MARNE

Bench Type

Single

Category

ARBITRATION ( 4 )

Sub-Category

Interim Relief ( 102 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Decision Date

27th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Acts & Sections

Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 Section 9

Petitioner(s)

Earthen Roots Pvt Ltd YNA LEGAL LLP

Respondent(s)

Vedant Innotech Pvt Ltd

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP V. MARNE

16-04-2026

FOR CIRCULATION

23-04-2026

FOR CIRCULATION

27-04-2026

FOR CIRCULATION

Orders

27-04-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP V. MARNE

The Bombay High Court converted Earthen Roots Pvt Ltd's Section 9 petition into a Section 17 application and referred the dispute with Vedant Innotech Pvt Ltd—arising from an October 2024 Authorized Agency Agreement—to arbitration with the consent of both parties. The court appointed Smt. Anuja Prabhudessai, a former judge, as sole arbitrator, with arbitral costs to be shared equally and subject to the final award. All substantive issues remain open for the arbitral tribunal to decide on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court converted Earthen Roots Pvt Ltd's Section 9 petition into a Section 17 application and referred the dispute with Vedant Innotech Pvt Ltd—arising from an October 2024 Authorized Agency Agreement—to arbitration with the consent of both parties. The court appointed Smt. Anuja Prabhudessai, a former judge, as sole arbitrator, with arbitral costs to be shared equally and subject to the final award. All substantive issues remain open for the arbitral tribunal to decide on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case