ARP-88-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO.88 OF 2026 Mr.Padamshi Kalyanji Gajra, ] Age : Adult, Occupation : Business, ] Residing at : 1102, Tripoli Building, ] Skyline Oasis, Premier Road, Near Kia ] Motors,Vidyavihar (West),Mumbai–400086. ] ...Petitioner Versus 1. M/s. Nidhi Royal Developers LLP, ] Limited Liability Partnership Firm, ] 7, Ground Floor, New Sonal Link ] Industrial Estate, Cooperative Society Ltd. ] Link Road, Bldg. No.1, Opp. Movie Time ] Threatre, Malad (West), Mumbai–400064. ] 2. Lalit Nagindas Doshi, ] Age : Adult, Occupation : Business, ] 91, Rustomjee Residency, Adarsh Dugdhalya, ] Marve Road, Malad (West), Mumbai–400064. ] 3. Shashikant Bhaskar Mhatre, Age : Adult, Occupation : Business, ] Shop No.19, Sai Tower, Diwanman, ] Ambadi Road, Vasai (West), ] Mumbai – 401 202. ] 4. Haresh Ramji Bhanushali, ] Age : Adult, Occupation : Business, ] 803/B, Pride Residency, Luxuria Parade Park, ] Near R Mall, Ghodbunder Road, ] Thane – 400 615. ] ...Respondents ==================================================== Mr.Rishikesh Soni i/b. Ms.Meena R. Sharma:- Advocate for Petitioner. Mr.Vignesh Ashokan i/b. Mr.Abhijeet Kandarkar:- Advocate for Respondent No.4. Satish Sangar 1/5 SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Digitally signed by SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Date: 2026.09.21 18:37:43 +0530 ARP-88-2026.doc ==================================================== CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATE : 18th SEPTEMBER 2026 P. C. :- 1. This matter is not on board. Taken on board as per the oral request and consented by other side as other two matters are on board. 2. Heard learned Advocate for the Petitioner and learned Advocate for Respondent No.4. 3. Mr.Kasle, learned Advocate is not available. An adjournment is sought. However, considering the issue and pleadings, I am not in favour of granting adjournment. The Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are duly served by way of private notice. The Respondent No.1 is the Partnership Firm consisting of the Petitioner and the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 as the Partners. 4. Already there is a Limited Liability Partnership Agreement (“LLP Agreement”) dated 28th January 2013 in between the parties to this Petition. There is Arbitration Clause No.24 (Page No.47). It suggests an appointment of Arbitrators. It reads thus:- “24. DISPUTE RESOLUTION All disputes, differences, claims and questions whatsoever, which shall arise either during the continuance of the limited liability partnership or Satish Sangar 2/5 ARP-88-2026.doc thereafter between the Partners or their representative(s) or between the Partner or Partners and the legal representative(s) of the other Partners touching these Presents, shall be referred to the arbitration of an Arbitral Tribunal consisting of three arbitrators, of which the two Designated Partners shall appoint 1 (one) arbitrator each and the two arbitrators so appointed shall appoint the third arbitrator. Such arbitration shall be carried out in accordance with and subject to the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or any statutory modification or re-enactment thereof for the time being in force and the decision of the Arbitrator/s shall be final and binding upon all parties. It is clarified that only the two Designated Partners shall have the right to appoint the 2(two) Arbitrators. Such arbitration shall be held in Mumbai”. 5. The Petitioner has invoked the Arbitration Clause and issued a notice dated 23rd February 2026 (Page No.122). The Respondent No.4 has replied through Advocate dated 16th March 2026 and in paragraph No.7, he has admitted about the existence of LLP Agreement. However, the name suggested by the Petitioner by way of unilateral nomination is not acceptable to the said Respondent. 6. The Respondent Nos.2 and 3 inspite of service, have not appeared. The Respondent No.4 has already filed a reply (Page No.140) and made certain allegations about the misconduct by the Petitioner. It is not acceptable to the Petitioner. Such allegation is outside the purview of an inquiry under Section 11 of the Arbitration Satish Sangar 3/5 ARP-88-2026.doc and Conciliation Act, 1996. There is no dispute about the existence of an Arbitration Clause in the LLP Agreement. 7. A case is made out for appointment of an Arbitrator. Hence, following order:- -: O R D E R :- (I) Mr.Drupad Patil, learned Advocate of this Court is hereby appointed as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties arising out and in connection with the matter referred above. Office address :- 1813, True Value Securities, Crescent Chambers, Tamarind Lane, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001. Email id :- drupadpatil@gmail.com Contact No. :- 9766464655. (II) The place of arbitration shall be at Mumbai. (III) A copy of this order will be communicated to the learned sole Arbitrator by the Advocates for the Petitioner within a period of one week from the date of upload of this order. The Petitioner shall provide the contact and communication particulars of the parties to the Arbitral Tribunal along with copy of this order. (IV) The learned sole Arbitrator is requested to forward the statutory Statement of Disclosure under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to the parties within a period of two weeks from receipt of copy of this order. Satish Sangar 4/5 ARP-88-2026.doc (V) The parties shall appear before the learned sole Arbitrator on such date and at such place as indicated, to obtain appropriate directions with regard to conduct of the arbitration including fixing a schedule for pleadings, examination of witnesses, if any, schedule of hearings etc. At such meeting, the parties shall provide a valid and functional email address along with mobile and landline numbers of the respective Advocates of the parties to the Arbitral Tribunal. Communications to such email addresses shall constitute valid service of correspondence in connection with the arbitration. (VI) All arbitral costs and fees of the Arbitral Tribunal shall be borne by the parties equally as per the Schedule. 8. The Arbitration Petition is disposed of. [S. M. MODAK, J.] Satish Sangar 5/5