Arbitration Appeal – Order of Arbitrator Refusing to implead Third Party
Judgment dated 4.5.026 of the High Court of Bombay in Arbitration Petition (L) No.40041 of 2025 of Deepak Shripat More Vs. Udaysingh Harinarayansingh Rajpurohit & others
Arbitration Appeal – Refusal to implead Third Party
The application to implead two new respondents to the arbitral proceedings by way of amendment to the statement of claim, was rejected. This was challenged in section 37(2)(a) appeal. The question was whether such an order of refusing to implead third party – veritable party is appealable.
on the first issue, in the facts of the case, it is apparent that a plea against jurisdiction was raised by not only Neema and Sakshi, but also by Rajpurohit. That plea having been accepted, the Impugned Order, to the extent it accepts the plea of absence of jurisdiction over Neema and Sakshi, is an appealable order. Therefore, the captioned Petition is indeed maintainable.
Significant monies were transferred from Shree to Sakshi and Neema. Neema is the spouse of Rajpurohit and Sakshi is the firm where Rajpurohit & Neema are the only partners. Therefore, they are veritable parties and recipients of funds from Shree.
