M/S SHINDE AND SONS, THROUGH IT S PARTNER SATISH BUDHAJIRAO SHINDE vs DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (CONSTRUCTION), CENTRAL RAILWAY, PRIVATE ROAD, NEAR R.B. MILL, PUNE AND OTHERS — CA/1565/2026

Case under Arbitration Act 1940 Section 11. Disposed: Contested--Withdrawn on 17th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM030513942025

Filing Number

CA/38006/2025

Filing Date

19-Dec-2025

Registration No

CA/1565/2026

Registration Date

06-Feb-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arun R. Pedneker

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arun R. Pedneker

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

17-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Withdrawn

Last updated 28-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Arbitration Act 1940 Section 11

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M/S SHINDE AND SONS, THROUGH IT S PARTNER SATISH BUDHAJIRAO SHINDE

    Adv. NAIK THIGLE GIRISH K

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (CONSTRUCTION), CENTRAL RAILWAY, PRIVATE ROAD, NEAR R.B. MILL, PUNE AND OTHERS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Arun R. PednekerView PDF

    The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) dismissed Civil Application No. 1565 of 2026 as withdrawn with liberty to approach the appropriate court. The applicant's counsel acknowledged that while the court previously entertained Section 29A applications of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the law is now settled that such applications must be filed before the concerned District Court, not the High Court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Apr-2026

    —

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Arun R. Pedneker

  4. 08-Apr-2026

    —

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Arun R. Pedneker

  5. 23-Mar-2026

    —

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin S. Deshmukh

  6. 27-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 19-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CA/1565/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) dismissed Civil Application No. 1565 of 2026 as withdrawn with liberty to approach the appropriate court. The applicant's counsel acknowledged that while the court previously entertained Section 29A applications of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the law is now settled that such applications must be filed before the concerned District Court, not the High Court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case