MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED vs Mark Enterprises — CARBP/826/2024
Case under Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 Section 9. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 15th April 2026.
CNR: HCBM020328812024
e-Filing Number
22-10-2024
Filing Number
CARBP/32870/2024
Filing Date
22-10-2024
Registration No
CARBP/826/2024
Registration Date
12-12-2024
Judge
HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI ARIF S. DOCTOR
Coram
HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI ARIF S. DOCTOR
Bench Type
Single
Category
ARBITRATION ( 4 )
Sub-Category
Extension of Arbitral Mandate ( 103 )
Judicial Branch
Original
Decision Date
15th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OFF
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED
Adv. ABHINEET A SHARMA
Respondent(s)
Mark Enterprises
Santosh Govindrao Kokate
Rakhesh Prabhakar Kothwade
Dinkar Varman Gaikwad
Hemendara Jayantilal Kapadia
Mona Amish Kapadia
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI ARIF S. DOCTOR
Circulation Matters
ARBP-FOR HEARING AND FINAL DISPOSAL U/S 9
ARBP-FOR HEARING AND FINAL DISPOSAL U/S 9
DUE MATTERS - ADJOURNED OS
DUE MATTERS - ADJOURNED OS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-02-2025 | Circulation Matters |
| 15-04-2026 | ARBP-FOR HEARING AND FINAL DISPOSAL U/S 9 |
| 01-04-2026 | ARBP-FOR HEARING AND FINAL DISPOSAL U/S 9 |
| 17-03-2026 | DUE MATTERS - ADJOURNED OS |
| 24-02-2026 | DUE MATTERS - ADJOURNED OS |
Orders
The Bombay High Court allowed Mafatlal Industries Limited to convert its Section 9 petition into a Section 17 application under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to be heard by the court-appointed arbitrator Ms. Megha Chandra. The court granted this conversion since an arbitrator had already been appointed and the respondent did not oppose the request, enabling the petitioner to seek interim relief before the arbitrator. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Bombay High Court allowed Mafatlal Industries Limited to convert its Section 9 petition into a Section 17 application under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to be heard by the court-appointed arbitrator Ms. Megha Chandra. The court granted this conversion since an arbitrator had already been appointed and the respondent did not oppose the request, enabling the petitioner to seek interim relief before the arbitrator. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts