Wadia Ghandy & Co. Successfully represented Maha Active Engineers India Private Limited (Maha Active) against Ashoka Buildcon Limited (Ashoka) across all three forums — the District Court of Nashik, the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court, in proceedings arising out of an application filed by them for Maha Active under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (said Act) for interim reliefs pending hearing and final disposal of the arbitration commenced by Maha Active against Ashoka for recovery of its dues under a subcontract awarded by Ashoka to Maha Active on a back-to-back basis under a principal contract between the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (MSEDCL) and Ashoka.

The Courts notably reaffirmed the discretionary powers under Section 9 of the said Act, which, though should not ordinarily be exercised ignoring the basic principles of procedural law, cannot be curtailed by the technicalities of CPC, for securing the ends of justice. The Courts reiterated that if the applicant seeking relief had made out a prima facie case, showed the balance of convenience in its favour and a likelihood of suffering irreparable loss, the court may not withhold relief merely on the technicality of absence of averments incorporating the grounds under Order 38, Rule 5 of the CPC.

Senior Partner, Bindi Dave led the matters before the Bombay High Court and District Court, Nashik, along with Senior Associate, Aayesh Gandhi and Associate, Gaurang Samel.

Partner Aman Gandhi led the matter before the Supreme Court of India along with Senior Associate, Parthasarathy Bose and Associate, Panchi Agarwal.