Namrata Tapan Bose vs Sunita Vilas Goankar

Judgment text excerpt

15-CARBP-246-2025-F.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION Digitally COMM. ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 246 OF 2025 signed by SHRADDHA SHRADDHA KAMLESH KAMLESH TALEKAR TALEKAR Date: 2025.07.15 Namrata Tapan Bose & Anr. ...Petitioners 16:25:29 +0530 Versus Sunita Vilas Gaonkar & Anr. ...Respondents Mr. Nigel Quraishy a/w. Dushyant Krishnan, Snehil Rai and Shruti Dubey for Petitioners-Namrata Tapan Bose and Aniket Bose. Dr. Uday Warunjikar a/w. Sumit Kate, for Respondent No. 1-Sunita Vilas Gaonkar. Ms. Archana Khan a/w. Suraj S. Iyer, for Respondent No. 2. Ms. Nandini Deshpande, 1st Assistant Court Receiver. CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. Date : July 14, 2025 Oral Judgement: Context and Background: 1. This is a Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”) in connection with the dissolution of a Partnership Deed dated June 14, 2023 (“Partnership Deed”) in relation to a partnership firm called M/s. Saikrupa Medical and General Stores (“ Saikrupa”). The firm Page 1 of 48 July 14, 2025 Shraddha 15-CARBP-246-2025-F.doc carries out the activity of running a chemist shop right across one of the busiest public hospitals in Mumbai – the K.E.M. Hospital in Parel. 2. It is the case of the Petitioners Ms. Namrata Tapan Bose and Mr. Aniket Tapan Bose (“Bose Siblings”) that their have rights systematically and consistently been frustrated by the conduct of the Respondents over the years, disenfranchising them as a matter of fact despite their legal entitlement having been declared in three rounds of litigation culminating in the Supreme Court too having upheld their rights. 3. Feeling disenfranchised and disentitled to any and every benefit that ought to be available to them as a