BOMAY TEXTILE RESEARCH ASSOCIATION vs NILKANTH ENTERPRISE

Judgment text excerpt

CARBP-519-2017.F doc PURTI IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY PRASAD PARAB ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Digitally signed by PURTI PRASAD PARAB Date: 2025.12.12 18:12:51 +0530 COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 519 OF 2017 Bombay Textile Research Association Petitioner Versus Nilkanth Enterprise Respondent Mr. Sarosh Bharucha a/w Mr. Rajendra Shah, Mr. Chirag Shah, Mr. Aakash Mehta and Mr. Divyang Salvi i/b. Mansukhlal Hiralal & Co., for Petitioner. Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, Senior Counsel a/w Mr. Bhanu Chopra, Ms. Soumya Mishra, Mr. Jahan Ajay Chokshi, Mr. Adit Furia and Mr. Kavish Pandya i/b. KJAC & Associates for Respondent. CORAM: SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. DATE: DECEMBER 12, 2025 JUDGEMENT : Context and Factual Background: 1. This Petition is filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Arbitration Act”) challenging an Arbitral Award dated August 5, 2017, granting specific performance of a Development Agreement discerned from a letter dated November 4, 2003 read with an unexecuted execution draft of a Development Agreement stamped in December 2004, further supplemented by Page 1 of 42 December 12, 2025 Purti Parab CARBP-519-2017.F doc Minutes of Meeting dated December 20, 2005 (collectively, “ Enforced Agreement”). 2. The contention of the Petitioner is that the Enforced Agreement could have never been the subject matter of specific performance inasmuch as what was referred to arbitration comprised a combination of instruments different from the combination of instruments that constitutes the Enforced Agreement. 3. Before dealing into the merits of the challenge, a brief factual over view would be appropriate : (a) The Petitioner, Bombay Textile Research Association (“BTRA”) is a private non-profit organization set up in conne