Williamson Magor And Co. Ltd vs Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd
2023 Latest Caselaw 8013 Bom

2023:BHC-OS:8240                                                    1-OSRPCDL-16663-2022+.DOC




                                                                                               Amol



                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                              ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                                        IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION
                                   REVIEW PETITION (L) NO. 16663 OF 2022
                                                       IN
                       COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 331 OF 2021


                    Aditya Khaitan                                                   ...Petitioner
                          Versus
                    Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd                                       ...Respondent

WITH CONTEMPT PETITION (L) NO. 10320 OF 2021 IN COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 331 OF 2021

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd ...Petitioner Versus Williamson Magor & Co Ltd & Anr ...Respondents

WITH REVIEW PETITION (L) NO. 16701 OF 2022 IN COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 331 OF 2021

Williamson Magor & Co Ltd ...Petitioner Versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd ...Respondent

8th August 2023

1-OSRPCDL-16663-2022+.DOC

Mr Prathamesh Kamat, with Vishal Shriya, Arsalan Thaver, i/b Vishal Shriyan, for the Petitioners in RPCDL/16663/2022, RPCDL/16701/2022.

Mr Dharam Jumani, with Mihir Nerulkar, Sneha Patil, i/b Maniar Srivastava Associates, for the Petitioner in CPCDL/10320/2021. Mr Dharam Jumani, with Mihir Nerulkar, Sneha Patil, i/b Maniar Srivastava Associates, for the Respondent in RPCDL/16663/2022, RPCDL/16701/2022.

                               CORAM     G.S. Patel J.
                               DATED:    8th August 2023
 PC:-

1. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd had filed Commercial Arbitration Petition No. 331 of 2021 under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. The two Review Petitioners were the Respondents to that Arbitration Petition. I passed an order on 5th March 2021 granting relief in the Section 9 Petition.

2. The present Review Petitions were filed on 24th January 2022 but were apparently neither served nor moved for listing for reasons best known to these Petitioners.

3. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd, the original Section 9 Petitioner, then filed an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. That came to be decided by a detailed order and

8th August 2023

1-OSRPCDL-16663-2022+.DOC

judgment dated 17th July 2023 of Hon'ble Mrs Justice Bharati Dangre J.1

4. I find from a copy of that judgment that fundamentally the same arguments were taken by the Review Petitioners before Dangre J as were taken before me in opposition to the Section 9 Petition. The Section 11 application was, therefore, the Review Petitioners' second bite at the cherry.

5. There remained in the form of these Review Petitions of a faint attempt at yet a third bite, but by this time the aforesaid cherry has been thoroughly masticated.

6. The grounds in the Review Petition, and it would be generous to call them that, are set out from paragraph 4 onwards. There is not a single ground here that is either not covered by the order under review or is not already firmly settled in law. It is only noteworthy that Dangre J's judgment finally decides the two issues that were never argued before me in the Section 9 Petition, namely, arbitrability and the question of stamp duty.

7. There is, therefore, absolutely no reason for interference. No ground for review is made out under Section 114 or Order 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

1 Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.v Williamson Magor and Co.Ltd.A Aar, CARAP No. 107 of 2021, decided on 17th July 2023.

8th August 2023

1-OSRPCDL-16663-2022+.DOC

8. The Review Petitions are dismissed but with no order as to costs.

9. The Contempt Petition will be listed according to the roster.

(G. S. Patel, J)

8th August 2023