Alag Property Constructions vs The Mulund Endeavor Co op Housing Society Pvt Ltd — HCBM20189422026

Case under Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 Section 37(2)(b). Next hearing: 15th June 2026.

CNR: HCBM020189422026

Next Hearing

15th June 2026

e-Filing Number

03-06-2026

Filing Number

CARBP/18941/2026

Filing Date

03-06-2026

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ABHAY AHUJA

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ABHAY AHUJA

Bench Type

Single

Category

ARBITRATION ( 4 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS ( 99 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Acts & Sections

Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 Section 37(2)(b)

Petitioner(s)

Alag Property Constructions

Adv. Sanjay Prabhakar Shinde

Respondent(s)

The Mulund Endeavor Co op Housing Society Pvt Ltd

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ABHAY AHUJA

11-06-2026

FOR CIRCULATION

15-06-2026

DUE MATTERS - ADJOURNED OS

Orders

11-06-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ABHAY AHUJA

Summary: In this Commercial Arbitration Petition, Alag Property Constructions sought urgent relief to enforce an arbitrator's interim order requiring Mulund Endeavor Co-op Housing Society to vacate property and allow re-entry within 21 days (ending 12 June 2026). The court found no case for urgency because the respondent had e-filed an application seeking discontinuation of the Court Receiver (who held symbolic possession), but this application remained unnumbered and unserved. Without the Court Receiver's discontinuation being properly processed, the tribunal-appointed private receiver could not take possession as directed. The petition was dismissed without interim order, and the matter was adjourned to 15 June 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: In this Commercial Arbitration Petition, Alag Property Constructions sought urgent relief to enforce an arbitrator's interim order requiring Mulund Endeavor Co-op Housing Society to vacate property and allow re-entry within 21 days (ending 12 June 2026). The court found no case for urgency because the respondent had e-filed an application seeking discontinuation of the Court Receiver (who held symbolic possession), but this application remained unnumbered and unserved. Without the Court Receiver's discontinuation being properly processed, the tribunal-appointed private receiver could not take possession as directed. The petition was dismissed without interim order, and the matter was adjourned to 15 June 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case