TATA CAPITAL LIMITED vs VIJAY DEVIJ AIYA

Judgment text excerpt

F-J-CARAP-237-2024-.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.237 OF 2024 WITH COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.243 OF 2024 Tata Capital Limited ...Applicant Versus Vijay Devij Aiya & Anr. ...Respondents Mr. Nikhil Mehta i/b KMC Legal Ventures Advocates for Applicants Mr. Shanay Shah a/w. Hemal Ganatra i/b. Hemal Ganatra, Advocates for Respondents. CORAM: SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. RESERVED ON: March 24, 2025 PRONOUNCED ON: April 22, 2025 JUDGEMENT: Context and Factual Background: 1. These Applications have been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ( “the Act”), seeking appointment of an arbitrator in connection with disputes and differences that are said to have arisen between the parties under a Loan Agreement dated Digitally signed by ASHWINI ASHWINI JANARDAN JANARDAN VALLAKATI VALLAKATI Date: 2025.04.22 14:27:25 +0530 Page 1 of 16 April 22, 2025 F-J-CARAP-237-2024-.doc January 31, 2016 and another top-up Loan Agreement dated October 31, 2017 (collectively, the “Agreement”). The arbitration agreement is contained in Clause 12.18 in each of the Applications (found at Page Nos. 44 and 46 respectively). 2. Since there is trenchant opposition to these Applications being allowed in view of the language contained in the arbitration agreement, the provisions of the arbitration agreement (identical for both Applications) are extracted below:- “if any dispute, difference or claim arises between the parties hereto in connection with this Agreement or the security hereof or the validity, Interpretation, Implementation or alleged breach of this Agreement or anything done or omitted to be done pursuant to this Agreement or otherwise in relation to the security hereof