SPB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 251 OF 2008 ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 251 OF 2008 ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 251 OF 2008 Kishor Dwarkanath Zanwar .. Petitioner. V/s. Chandrakant Harakhlal Gandhi .. Respondent. --- Mr.R.D.Soni i/by Bipin Joshi for the Petitioner. Mr. Anilkumar Patil for the Respondent. --- CORAM : D.G.KARNIK,J. CORAM : D.G.KARNIK,J. CORAM : D.G.KARNIK,J. DATE : 17TH JUNE 2008 DATE : 17TH JUNE 2008 DATE : 17TH JUNE 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C.: . Heard by consent of the parties finally. 2. By this petition the petitioner seeks interim relief in the nature of injunction pending decision by an arbitral tribunal on a dispute between him and the respondent No.1 regarding their partnership. 3. By a deed of partnership dated 19th April, 2005 the petitioner and the respondent entered into a partnership to carry on business as builders, developers and promoters. Clause 14 of the Partnership deed provides that the partners would open a bank account or accounts in the name of the firm, which would be operated jointly. Clause 21 of the partnership deed - 2 - provides for arbitration. Disputes having arisen between the parties, the petitioner issued a notice to the respondent to refer the dispute to the arbitration. Pending the constitution of the arbitral tribunal and its decision (award), the petitioner seeks interim relief. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent is diverting the assets and property of the firm for his personal use. The respondent has opened a bank account in another bank (the Bank of Baroda) in the name of the firm showing it to be proprietary concern. The respondent is depositing the sale-proceeds of flats/apartments/premsies of the firm into the said proprietary account and siphoning of the money and property of the firm. The petitioner therefore prays for an interim relief of injunction. 5. In the affidavit in reply, the respondent admits having opened a bank account in the name of the firm showing himself as a proprietor. Obviously this cannot be done by the respondent. The respondent can neither receive the profit derived from the business of the firm for his personal use nor can he divert sale- proceeds of the firm’s property and deposit them in another proprietary bank account of himself. Similarly, he cannot carry on business in the name of the proprietary - 3 - concern and competing with the firm. In the circumstances, in my opinion, the petitioner is entitled to an injunction pending the arbitration. Hence, I pass the following order : 6. The respondent is restrained by an order of injunction in terms of prayer clause (a)(1) and (a)(2). It is clarified that the injunction relating to clause (a)(2) shall apply in respect of the proprietary account, which the respondent has opened in the Bank of Baroda, Ghatkopar (E) in the name of the M/s. Shyam Constructions. 7. This order shall remain in operation for a period of four months. During the period of four months, the petitioner is a liberty to get the arbitral tribunal constituted and move it for appropriate reliefs under section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. (D.G. KARNIK, J.) .....