Bombay HC appoints arbitrator to resolve Mansukhani brothers' dispute
The court, meanwhile, kept all contentions of both brothers for arbitration open. The cost of arbitration needs to be borne by both brothers equally, the court ordered
 "Bombay HC appoints arbitrator to resolve Mansukhani brothers' dispute")
The high court here on Friday appointed senior advocate Atul Rajadhyaksha as sole arbitrator to decide on the dispute between the Mansukhani brothers, promoters of Man Industries.
Hearing the case filed for arbitration by Jagdishchandra Mansukhani against Rameshchandra Mansukhani, Judge S J Kathawalla observed, “By consent of the parties, Rajadhyaksha is appointed as the sole arbitrator to decide the disputes between the parties relating to the deed of family settlement dated September 11, 2013.”
“The learned arbitrator shall treat this petition under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and dispose of the same at the earliest,” the judge added.
Under Section 17 of the Act, the case needs to be disposed of within one year.
The court kept all contentions of both brothers for arbitration open. The cost of arbitration would be shared by both brothers equally, the court ordered.
The Man Industries’ promoters have been in a dispute since 2009 over distribution of assets. Under supervision of the Bombay High Court, the deed of family settlement was finalised on September 11, 2013.
Rameshchandra Mansukhani was to take full control of Man Industries’ pipes business and the infrastructure business was to be hived off into a separate company, Man Infraprojects, which was to go to Jagdishchandra Mansukhani. Assets worth Rs 100 crore were to be allotted to Man Infraprojects at various locations.
The scheme of demerger was approved by the Bombay High Court and the Securities and Exchange Board of India. It was also decided that Man Industries’ shareholders would receive one share in Man Infraprojects for every share held in Man Industries
“We found a shortfall in the value of the properties on evaluation and thus we claimed the deficit of Rs 55 crore to be met, which was rejected. Later, Rameshchandra Mansukhani agreed to pay Rs 25 crore, which was unacceptable to me,” said Jagdishchandra Mansukhani.
Following the differences in valuation, the Bombay High Court appointed JC Barua as a mediator. A few weeks ago the mediator submitted a report that he could not arrive at a solution.
Because of the differences between the brothers, 20,000 shareholders of Man Industries are yet to be allotted shares in Man Infraprojects. Man Industries has not declared the record date for implementation of the scheme of demerger.
Responding to a query, a Man Industries spokesperson said, “As regards implementation of the scheme of demerger, the matter is sub judice in the Bombay High Court.”
Hearing the case filed for arbitration by Jagdishchandra Mansukhani against Rameshchandra Mansukhani, Judge S J Kathawalla observed, “By consent of the parties, Rajadhyaksha is appointed as the sole arbitrator to decide the disputes between the parties relating to the deed of family settlement dated September 11, 2013.”
“The learned arbitrator shall treat this petition under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and dispose of the same at the earliest,” the judge added.
Under Section 17 of the Act, the case needs to be disposed of within one year.
The court kept all contentions of both brothers for arbitration open. The cost of arbitration would be shared by both brothers equally, the court ordered.
The Man Industries’ promoters have been in a dispute since 2009 over distribution of assets. Under supervision of the Bombay High Court, the deed of family settlement was finalised on September 11, 2013.
Rameshchandra Mansukhani was to take full control of Man Industries’ pipes business and the infrastructure business was to be hived off into a separate company, Man Infraprojects, which was to go to Jagdishchandra Mansukhani. Assets worth Rs 100 crore were to be allotted to Man Infraprojects at various locations.
The scheme of demerger was approved by the Bombay High Court and the Securities and Exchange Board of India. It was also decided that Man Industries’ shareholders would receive one share in Man Infraprojects for every share held in Man Industries
“We found a shortfall in the value of the properties on evaluation and thus we claimed the deficit of Rs 55 crore to be met, which was rejected. Later, Rameshchandra Mansukhani agreed to pay Rs 25 crore, which was unacceptable to me,” said Jagdishchandra Mansukhani.
Following the differences in valuation, the Bombay High Court appointed JC Barua as a mediator. A few weeks ago the mediator submitted a report that he could not arrive at a solution.
Because of the differences between the brothers, 20,000 shareholders of Man Industries are yet to be allotted shares in Man Infraprojects. Man Industries has not declared the record date for implementation of the scheme of demerger.
Responding to a query, a Man Industries spokesperson said, “As regards implementation of the scheme of demerger, the matter is sub judice in the Bombay High Court.”