7-IA-5477-2025 (OS).DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 5477 OF 2025 IN COMMERCIAL SUIT NO.(L) NO.14654 OF 2025 Fagioli S.P.A. … Applicant Defendant No.1 In the matter between: Express Global Logistics Pvt. Ltd. … Plaintiff Versus Fagioli S.P.A. & Ors. … Defendants _______ Mr. Vikramaditya Singh a/w. Mr. Bhavesh Paithane i/b. Mr. Ashwin Kapadnis for the Applicant and for Defendant Nos.1 and 2. Mr. Vishal Sheth a/w. Ms. Isha Sawant for the Plaintiff / Defendant No. 3 _______ CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J. DATE : 21st AUGUST, 2026 P.C. 1. The Interim Application seeks reference of the captioned Commercial Suit to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Basavraj Page|1 BASAVRAJ GURAPPA PATIL Digitally signed by BASAVRAJ GURAPPA PATIL Date: 2026.08.29 11:02:00 +0530 7-IA-5477-2025 (OS).DOC 2. Mr. Singh, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant i.e., Defendant No. 1 and also Defendant No. 2 at the outset points out that this Court has, vide an Order dated 19th December 2025, already appointed an arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes and differences that have arisen between the Plaintiff and Defendant Nos. 1 and 3. He therefore submits that the present Suit which arises out of the same agreement and pertains to the same dispute, also be referred to arbitration before the same Learned Arbitrator, who is a former Judge of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 3. Mr. Sheth, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Plaintiff, does not oppose but only seeks a clarification that even Defendant No. 2, to the present Suit shall be a party to the arbitration. 4. Mr. Singh, submits that Defendant No. 2 is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Defendant No. 1 and that an Application seeking impleadment of Defendant No. 2 is already pending before the learned Arbitral Tribunal. He submits that the said Application may be considered by the learned Basavraj Page|2 7-IA-5477-2025 (OS).DOC Tribunal on its own merits. 5. However, insofar as the present Application is concerned, I do not see how Defendant No. 1, having itself sought reference of the captioned Suit to arbitration, can oppose the participation of Defendant No. 2 in the arbitration proceedings, particularly when Defendant No. 2 is already a party to the captioned Suit. 6. Hence, the Interim Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). 7. The learned Arbitrator shall now proceed with the arbitration and issue such necessary directions as may be required for the conduct of the proceedings, including in relation to the filing of pleadings and evidence and the hearing of the parties. 8. At this stage, learned Counsel appearing for Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 seeks a clarification that, for the present, the learned Tribunal shall not issue directions for completion of pleadings, filing of evidence or other Basavraj Page|3 7-IA-5477-2025 (OS).DOC procedural compliance, as far as Defendant No. 2 is concerned. There is no opposition to this request. 9. Therefore, it is accordingly clarified that, for the present, no such directions shall be issued by the learned Tribunal insofar as Defendant No. 2 is concerned. [ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.] Basavraj Page|4