SC to hear Kirloskar case onNov 25
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Friday agreed to hear on November 25 the plea on Kirloskar Brothers Ltd’s family feud related to assets in which KBL CMD Sanjay Kirloskar has challenged the Bombay High Court order directing arbitration in the case.
A bench headed by Chief Justice N V Ramana, on July 27 had ordered status quo in the matter and asked the parties involved in the case to explore the possibility of mediation.
“This was the Kriloskar family dispute wherein the this court on July 27 had expressed views on exploring the mediation possibility and it is very sad that we have written about even appointing the mediator now we are three-four months down and mediator has been appointed,” senior advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for Sanjay Kriloskar, told the bench which also comprised justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli.
Now, the other side has been coming out with new competing products, Singhvi said, urging to list the case.
The bench said it the plea may be listed for hearing on November 25.
Earlier, the case was also extended to the proceedings in the Pune civil court on KBL seeking damages.
Asking the parties involved in the case to explore the possibility of mediation, the bench had issued notice on the appeal by
Sanjay Kirloskar and asked them to file replies within six weeks.
The top court had asked Kirloskar brothers—Sanjay and Atul with others to explore mediation to resolve the family dispute relating to the assets.
“We both (judges) feel it is one of the reputed families and companies. We feel the issues are sorted out by mediation or arbitration which is better in the interest of the company,” the bench had said.
“You go on litigating in the civil courts, you know. I don’t want to comment on the system. All the lawyers can sit together and solve a way out and if you want some external assistance we can appoint a retired judge. Why do you unnecessarily want to fight this litigation? You can have some alternative resolution. There must be some common family friends and they can mediate,” the bench had said.