AM REALTY INFO PRIVATE LIMITED vs Krishlex Polymers Pvt Ltd — HCBM20117062026

Case under Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 Section 9. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020117062026

e-Filing Number

01-04-2026

Filing Number

CARBP/11706/2026

Filing Date

02-Apr-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

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 20-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 Section 9

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AM REALTY INFO PRIVATE LIMITED

    Adv. Namdev Gore

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Krishlex Polymers Pvt Ltd

  2. 2.Krishna Synthetics

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Jun-2026

    For Circulation

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. Marne

  3. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. MarneView PDF

    The Bombay High Court appointed Mr. Yashvardhan Momaya as sole arbitrator to resolve disputes between AM Realty Info Private Limited and Krishlex Polymers Pvt Ltd arising from a Memorandum of Understanding and Agreement for Sale dated 14 July 2025. Although the respondent contended the agreements had expired, the court found no dispute regarding the arbitration clause's existence and proceeded with arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, with arbitral costs to be shared equally by both parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 18-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. MarneView PDF

  5. 02-Apr-2026

    Case filed

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court appointed Mr. Yashvardhan Momaya as sole arbitrator to resolve disputes between AM Realty Info Private Limited and Krishlex Polymers Pvt Ltd arising from a Memorandum of Understanding and Agreement for Sale dated 14 July 2025. Although the respondent contended the agreements had expired, the court found no dispute regarding the arbitration clause's existence and proceeded with arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, with arbitral costs to be shared equally by both parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case