*1* nms.336.3826.09 kps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.336 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.142 OF 2009 With NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3826 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.142 OF 2009. Kamalbir Jagtar Singh and others. ..Plaintiffs -Versus- Renu Sondhi and others. ..Defendants .......... Mr.Janak Dwarkadas, Senior Counsel a/w Mr.Gaurav Joshi i/b DSK Legal, for the Plaintiffs. Mr.P.K.Dhakephalkar, Senior Counsel a/w Mr.P.K.Vyas for the Defendant Nos.1 to 6. .......... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 21st September, 2010. P.C. 1 Notice of Motion No.3826/2009 is by the Defendants in the suit and it is for the following relief:- “(a) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to order and direct that the subject matter of the present suit and parties thereto viz. Plaintiffs and Defendants Nos.1 to 6 be referred to arbitration in accordance with Clause 8 of the MFS under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act, 1996”).” *2* nms.336.3826.09 2 Notice of Motion No.336/2009 is by the Plaintiffs in the suit for interim reliefs. 3 My attention is invited to the prayers in the suit particularly declaration claimed that the memorandum of family settlement, Annexure-F to the plaint, is valid, subsisting, binding and effective and the Court be, therefore, pleased to declare the share of Plaintiffs on that basis and direction be issued to implement the said family settlement. 4 My attention is also invited to Annexure-F to the plaint wherein the copy of family settlement is annexed and it is then urged that clause-8 thereof speaks of arbitration by the named arbitrator. 5 After the matter was heard for sometime, both sides agreed that the matter can be referred to Arbitration. However, it is contended on behalf of the Defendants by the learned Senior Counsel Mr.Dhakephalkar that the arbitration shall be by three arbitrators whereas the Plaintiffs urge that the arbitration should be by a sole arbitrator. 6 Considering the fact that the dispute is between family members and both of them desire early end to the same so also, some of them being based in Delhi, interest of justice would be served if the arbitration is by a sole arbitrator at Mumbai. Accordingly, Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.N.Srikrishna (Retired Judge of the Supreme Court of India) is appointed as a sole arbitrator. He shall adjudicate upon all disputes and differences between the parties arising out the memorandum of family settlement, a copy of which is annexed at Exhibit-F to the plaint. All contentions of the parties in that behalf are kept open. 7 Since Notice of Motion No.3826/2009 is moved by all Defendants, needless to state that the Defendant No.6 Mr.Analjit Singh *3* nms.336.3826.09 will also be bound and liable by this order. Mr.Dhakephalkar confirms the said fact. 8 To enable the parties to make appropriate applications before the sole arbitrator, it is directed by consent that ad-interim order dated 04.02.2009 passed in Notice of Motion No.336/2009 shall continue during the pendency of the arbitral proceedings and for four weeks thereafter. 9 Needless to state that parties agree that the present position of status-quo in respect of the properties shall be maintained and no transfer thereof is permitted saved except in accordance with the directions of the sole arbitrator. 10 Both the Notice of Motions stand disposed of in terms of this order. 11 By consent of parties, the suit is taken up on daily board and stands disposed of in terms of this order. No costs. Refund of Court fees as per rules and if permissible. (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J)