Gujarat Narmada Valley ... vs The New India Assurance Company ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 511 Bom

          Digitally signed
          by GAURI
GAURI     AMIT
AMIT      GAEKWAD                                   1/2               207-COMAP-9-2016.doc
GAEKWAD   Date:
          2023.01.16
          10:40:48 +0530
                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                                      IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION

                                      COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO.9 OF 2016
                                                     IN
                                     NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2204 OF 2015
                                                     IN
                                    ARBITRATION PETITION NO.1709 OF 2015

             Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Company Limited   .....Appellant
                   Vs.
             The New India Assurance Company Limited              .....Respondent
                                                 ----
             Mr. Darius Khambata, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Rohaan Cama, Mr. Rakesh
             Mandavkar and Ms. Vidhi Shah i/b. Mr. Bhavesh V. Panjuani of Mulla and
             Mulla and CBC for appellant.
             Mr. Prathamesh Kamat a/w. Mr. Vikram Kamath and Ms. Madhavi Doshi i/b.
             Phoenix Legal for respondent.
                                                 ----
                                                  CORAM : K. R. SHRIRAM &
                                                           RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATED : 13th JANUARY 2023

P.C. :

1 After the counsels were heard for some time, one thing that

emerged is that the order, which is impugned in this appeal, will require

reconsideration in view of subsequent judgments in the cases of Indus

Mobile Distribution Private Limited V/s. Datawind Innovations Private

Limited and Ors.1 and BBR (India) Private Limited V/s. S.P. Singhla

Constructions Private Limited2.

2 Therefore, appellant is at liberty to move the learned Single

Judge to reconsider the position on the seat of arbitration as decided in the

1. 2017 (7) SCC 678

2. 2022 SCC Online SC 642

Gauri Gaekwad 2/2 207-COMAP-9-2016.doc

impugned order before proceeding with Section 34 petition on merits. The

relief to be granted in such an application has already been raised in the

disposed notice of motion and the Court to reconsider the same relief.

3 Mr. Kamat states that if such an application is made,

respondents will co-operate for disposing the application but at the same

time, their rights and contentions be kept open to oppose the applications

on merits.

4 Keeping open all rights and contentions of the parties, appeal

accordingly disposed.

5 We clarify that we have not made any observations on the

merits of the matter.

6 We further clarify that the learned Single Judge will decide

appellant's application on seat of arbitration on its own merits.

7 We also clarify that what is to be done with the money that was

deposited by respondent and subsequently withdrawn by appellant

pursuant to order passed by this Court in the appeal may also be decided by

the learned Single Judge.

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.) (K. R. SHRIRAM, J.)

Gauri Gaekwad