ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO.15468 OF 2026

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Polestar Realtors Private Limited, filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking interim relief against respondents, who are members of Rachana Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. The petitioner claimed to be the owner of the land leased to the society and had entered into a development agreement dated 26 December 2023 for redevelopment. After obtaining necessary approvals, the petitioner issued notices to vacate, but respondents Nos.2 to 26 refused to hand over possession of their flats, obstructing the redevelopment. The petitioner argued that these members were in breach of the development agreement, particularly clauses 15.2 and 15.3, and sought directions for vacation and appointment of a court receiver. Respondents Nos.19 to 26 contended that respondent No.24 had been earlier appointed as developer and the termination of that agreement was challenged in Commercial Suit No.409 of 2017, where no interim order was passed. The court heard arguments but the judgment text is incomplete, and the final decision is not available.

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 pending arbitration; whether respondent Nos.2 to 26 are in breach of the Development Agreement dated 26 December 2023 requiring them to vacate their flats; whether the existence of a prior terminated development agreement with respondent No.24 affects the petitioner's rights.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (BOM) (07) 30

Arbitration Petition (L) No. 15468 of 2026 with Interim Application (L) No. 23252 of 2026

2026-07-17

Amit Borkar, J.

Mustafa Doctor, Nitya Parikh, Kinnar Shah, Aditi Bhargava, Tejasvati Singh (for petitioner); Zubin Benramkamdin, Akshay R. Pai, Avadhut V. Patil, Suryajeet Ravrane, Omkar Ravrane, Harshwardhan Gaikwad (for respondent No.1); Surya Das (for respondent No.2); Prachi Tatake (for respondent Nos.8,10,11,12,17); Bharat Choudhari, Abinash Pradhan, Garima Agrawal, Yash Dedhia (for respondent No.13); UditKumar Gupta (for respondent Nos.14 & 15); Masira Shaikh (for respondent No.16); Girish Godbole, Sachin S. Rawool (for respondent No.19); Sachin S. Rawool (for respondent Nos.20,22,23); Shailendra Kanetkar, Sachin S. Rawool (for respondent No.21); Zal Andhyarujina, Parimal K. Shroff, D.V. Deokar, Sachin Pandey, D. Parikh (for respondent Nos.24 & 25); Mayur Khandeparkar, Sachin S. Rawool (for respondent No.26); S.U. Kamdar (for applicant in IAL/23252/2026)

Polestar Realtors Private Limited

Rachana Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. & 25 Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Arbitration petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking interim reliefs pending arbitration proceedings in a redevelopment dispute.

Remedy Sought

Directions to respondents to vacate flats, appointment of Court Receiver, and ancillary reliefs to facilitate redevelopment.

Filing Reason

Respondent Nos.2 to 26 refused to vacate their flats and hand over possession despite Development Agreement and approvals, obstructing redevelopment.

Previous Decisions

Consent decree dated 7 March 2017 in T.E. and R. Suit No.177/192 of 2014; no interim order granted in Commercial Suit No.409 of 2017.

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 pending arbitration. Whether respondent Nos.2 to 26 are in breach of the Development Agreement dated 26 December 2023 requiring them to vacate their flats. Whether the existence of a prior terminated development agreement with respondent No.24 affects the petitioner's rights.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that members are bound by Development Agreement clauses 15.2 and 15.3 and must vacate; majority of members have consented; approvals obtained; redevelopment cannot proceed without possession. Respondent Nos.19 to 26 argued that respondent No.24 was earlier appointed as developer, and the termination of that agreement is challenged; no interim order has been granted protecting respondent No.24.

Judgment Excerpts

By this petition, the petitioner is asking for temporary relief till the disputes are referred to and decided by an Arbitral Tribunal. the petitioner has requested this Court to direct those respondents to vacate their flats and cooperate in the redevelopment. the petitioner has also prayed for appointment of a Court Receiver to take possession of the flats and hand over the same to the petitioner so that the redevelopment work can proceed without any hindrance. According to him, these members have acted in breach of the Development Agreement, particularly Clauses 15.2 and 15.3, by refusing to vacate and hand over possession of their respective flats.

Procedural History

Petitioner filed T.E. and R. Suit No.177/192 of 2014 seeking eviction; during pendency, petitioner offered redevelopment; society accepted in Special General Body Meeting on 8 January 2017; consent terms executed and suit disposed of by consent decree dated 7 March 2017. Development Agreement approved in Special General Body Meeting on 16 December 2022 and executed on 26 December 2023. Intimation of Approval obtained from Slum Rehabilitation Authority on 4 February 2026 and 16 February 2026. Notice to vacate issued on 20 February 2026; some members failed to vacate; hence present Section 9 petition filed. Also, Commercial Suit No.409 of 2017 filed by respondent No.24 challenging termination of earlier development agreement, with no interim order granted.

Acts & Sections

  • Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 9
  • Development Control and Promotion Regulations, 2034: Regulations 33(10), 33(11)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO.15468 OF 2026
Related Judgement
High Court Income Tax Appeals by Wipro Limited and Revenue Against Orders of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore for Assessment Years 2001-2002 to 2004-2005