Relief Sought, Not Property Location, Decides Jurisdiction If Arbitration Seat Is Unspecified: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has recently held that territorial jurisdiction cannot be determined solely by the location of partnership properties or the registered office of a partnership firm where the partnership deed containing an arbitration clause does not specify the arbitral seat.Instead, the court held, the material facts constituting the foundation of the relief sought must determine jurisdiction.Justice Amit Borkar delivered the ruling while deciding a petition filed by Vinod Kumar Saraf...

Conflicting Dispute Resolution Clauses Should Be Interpreted in Favour of Arbitration: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has recently held that where a commercial contract contains conflicting dispute resolution clauses, courts should lean in favour of arbitration if the agreement, read as a whole, reflects the parties' intention to resolve disputes through arbitration. Justice M. W. Chandwani of the Nagpur bench delivered the ruling while deciding an application filed by Sri Buddha–SVEC JV against Western Coalfields Ltd. The court referred the parties to conciliation before Advocate...

IT Reassessment Notice Received On April 1, 2021, Must Follow New Reassessment Regime: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that an income tax reassessment notice dated and digitally signed on March 31, 2021, cannot be treated as having been issued on that date if it was actually dispatched through the Income Tax Business Application (ITBA) portal and reached the assessee only on April 1, 2021. The court ruled that the notice would be deemed to have been issued on April 1, 2021, and the reassessment proceedings must continue under the framework introduced by the Finance Act, 2021. A...

Bombay High Court Issues Contempt Notices To Mumbai Collector Tahsildar Over MahaRERA Recovery Warrants

The Bombay High Court on 10 July initiated contempt proceedings against the Collector of Mumbai and Tahsildar Dilip Rayannavar after finding prima facie non-compliance with its directions on execution of Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) recovery warrants. A Division Bench of Justices A. S. Gadkari and Kamal Khata issued show-cause notices under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, holding that the Collector failed to comply with the direction to file a personal...

Corporate Guarantee Cannot Replace Unconditional Bank Guarantee Agreed Between Parties: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has recently held that a corporate guarantee cannot replace an unconditional bank guarantee agreed between commercial parties merely because a party is willing to furnish one, observing that the two provide different degrees of security. Granting interim relief to Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. (ONGC), Justice Amit Borkar directed Afcons Gunanusa Joint Venture to renew and continue unconditional bank guarantees worth USD 29.91 million, EUR 4.55 million and ₹22.09...

Merely Obtaining Municipal Approvals Does Not Establish Developer's Readiness To Perform Contract: Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court has refused to grant interim relief to Jaycee Homes Private Limited in its plea to restrain Kurla Moon Rock Municipal Employee Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. from appointing another developer and to appoint a Court Receiver over the society's property. It held that obtaining municipal approvals under a registered development agreement, by itself, does not establish that a developer was ready and willing to perform its contractual obligations. Justice Amit Borkar...

Bombay High Court Declines Urgent Relief In Phantom Studios' Suit Against JioStar Over 'Queen' Remake

The Bombay High Court has declined to grant urgent ad-interim relief to Phantom Studios India Private Limited in its suit against JioStar India Private Limited over the film Queen Forever, which Phantom alleges is an unauthorised sequel to the 2014 film Queen made in breach of the parties' co-production and intellectual property arrangements.Justice Gauri Godse was hearing an interim application filed by Phantom Studios in its suit claiming 50 per cent joint ownership of intellectual property...

Intended Business Use Of Office Premises Does Not Make Dispute Commercial: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has recently reiterated that merely intending to use office premises for business is insufficient to bring a dispute within the jurisdiction of a Commercial Court. It ruled that the Commercial Courts Act requires the immovable property to have been actually used exclusively in trade or commerce and not merely intended or proposed to be so used. Justice N.J. Jamadar observed, “Indeed, the Commercial Courts Act,2015 does not define the expression “trade” or “commerce”....

Allowing Group Company To Use Part Of Company's Premises Does Not Create Third-Party Rights: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has recently held that permitting another company within the same business group to use part of a company's premises does not amount to induction of a third party merely because money changes hands between the two entities. The court observed that payments between group companies may merely be internal accounting arrangements and do not, by themselves, create a presumption of tenancy or a commercial licence. Justice Sandeep V. Marne dismissed a revision application filed...

Bombay High Court Orders Occupants To Vacate, Says Delay By Few Members May Affect Entire Redevelopment Project

The Bombay High Court has granted interim relief pending arbitration by directing three occupants of a co-operative housing society to vacate their premises within two weeks. The court held that, in the facts of the case, the disputes raised by them could not justify delaying a redevelopment project after 15 of the society's 17 members had already executed the redevelopment documents and the necessary municipal approvals had been obtained. Justice Amit Borkar observed, “Delay by only a few...

Bombay High Court Upholds ₹86.02 Lakh Award Against CDSL Says Depositories Cannot Avoid Liability

The Bombay High Court on 2 July held that a depository cannot escape liability for loss caused to an investor due to negligence by its depository participant by claiming that the participant became the beneficial owner of the securities after transfer. A Division Bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande upheld an arbitral award directing Central Depository Services (India) Ltd. (CDSL) to pay Rs. 86.02 lakh with 9% post award interest to investor Daksha Bhavsar. The judges...

Bombay HC Says Patent Rejection Cannot Rest On Bald Common Knowledge Claim, Remands Deepak Nitrite Case

The Bombay High Court on 6 July held that the Controller of Patents cannot reject a patent application by relying on “common general knowledge” unless the source of such knowledge is identified and it is established that the knowledge existed before the application's priority date. Justice Arif Doctor set aside the order passed by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs rejecting Deepak Nitrite Limited's patent application for a free-flowing food grade sodium nitrite and its production...