Uvik Technologies Private Limited vs Nearby Technologies Private Limited

Judgment text excerpt

16-CARBPL-18306-2025-F-28-7.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO. 18306 OF 2025 Digitally signed by SHRADDHA SHRADDHA KAMLESH Uvik Technologies Private Limited .. Petitioner KAMLESH TALEKAR TALEKAR Date: Vs. 2025.07.28 20:30:37 +0530 Nearby Technologies Private Limited & Anr. .. Respondents Mr. Hasit Seth a/w. Hrishikesh Chavan and Ms. Sharmishtha Patil i/b Ashish T. Suryavanshi, for Petitioner. Mr. Vikram Aditya Singh (through VC), for Respondents. CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. Date : July 23, 2025 Oral Judgement: Context and Factual Background: 1. This Petition essentially invokes Section 14(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”), seeking substitution of the Learned Sole Arbitrator on the premise of controversy subsisting over independence and impartiality of the Learned Arbitrator The jurisdiction under which this Petition has been filed would require this Court to answer whether a case has been made out to hold that the Learned Sole Arbitrator has become de-jure or de-facto unable to perform her functions. Page 1 of 22 July 23, 2025 Shraddha 16-CARBPL-18306-2025-F-28-7.doc 2. The factual matrix in which interference of this Court under Section 14(2) of the Act has been sought can be summarized thus : A) The Learned Arbitrator is accused of having assisted the Respondents by personally visiting the office of the Stamp Authorities to explain the position obtaining in law under the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 ( “Stamp Act”) thereby demonstrating bias in favour of the Respondents; B) According to the Petitioner, the Learned Arbitrator computed the unquantified interest rate on the amount of claim made by one of the parties into an act