Synopsis

A development agreement (containing an arbitration clause) between a housing society and a developer led to a section 9 petition filed in 2017 seeking various interim reliefs. Over nearly a decade, the court passed wide‑ranging orders, including attaching the developer’s assets and restraining him from dealing with any projects, even those unrelated to the dispute. Thirty‑one interim applications were filed by various third parties – decree‑holders, flat allottees, family members of the developer’s partners, and even the municipal corporation – seeking intervention and release of funds. After an arbitral tribunal was finally constituted in 2024 and passed a section 17 order, the high court held that the section 9 proceedings must merge into the section 17 jurisdiction. The court dismissed or disposed of all third‑party applications, holding that only parties to the arbitration agreement or “veritable parties” can invoke section 9; third parties without privity cannot intervene. The court directed the tribunal to determine the amount necessary to secure the society’s claim, release surplus to the developer, and left third parties to pursue remedies in appropriate forums (execution courts, consumer fora, etc.).

Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan (Single Judge)

Date of Judgment: 29th April 2026

Citation: Commercial Arbitration Petition No. 559 of 2017 (unreported)

Core Law: Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Sections 9 (interim measures by Court), 17 (interim measures by Arbitral Tribunal), 2(1)(h) (definition of “party”); Doctrine of veritable parties; Jurisdiction over third parties.

1. Heading of the judgment

High court of judicature at bombay ordinary original civil jurisdiction

Commercial arbitration petition no. 559 of 2017 and connected interim applications

Mulund raviraj co‑operative housing society ltd. (petitioner) vs. Rupji constructions & anr. (respondents)

Coram: hon’ble mr. justice somasekhar sundaresan

Date: 29th april, 2026

2. Legal framework

Major laws and provisions involved:

• Arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 – section 9 (interim measures by court), section 17 (interim measures by arbitral tribunal), section 2(1)(h) (definition of “party” – a party to the arbitration agreement)

• Doctrine of “veritable parties” (non‑signatories who may be bound by arbitration agreement) as laid down in cox and kings ltd. v. sap india pvt. ltd., asf buildtech pvt. ltd. v. china development bank and advaya hospitality pvt. ltd. v. shri rama builders

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.