MAJMUDAR & PARTNERS Vs. MICHAEL MARSHALL & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ( "the said Act ") and has been moved before me today for urgent ad-interim relief, ex-parte. The reason for moving ex-parte has been set out in paragraph 25 of the Petition. In the circumstances set out below, it is the apprehension of the Petitioner that if notice had been given for today 's hearing, there would have been a likelihood of Respondent No. 1, a law firm based in the United States of America, proceeding to institute legal proceedings in a Court in Illinois, USA, in a manner contrary to the contemplation of the Petitioner and Respondent No. 1 who have agreed for any disputes between them to be resolved under Indian law and by arbitration in Mumbai under the said Act.

(2.) The brief facts leading to the filing of the Petition, and so far as they are relevant for the purpose of this order, are set out below.

(3.) The Petitioner is a partnership firm and a leading Indian law firm stated to be servicing clients nationally and internationally since 1943, in various fields, as set out in the Petition. Respondent No. 1 through its concerned associates, is a law firm by the name Huck Bouma P.C. based in Illinois, USA. Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 are the clients of Respondent No. 1.