The Bombay High Court has ruled that when a party is aware of a termination notice and conducts itself as if the termination has taken effect, it cannot later seek interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The division bench comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice M.S. Karnik delivered this judgment while dismissing an appeal filed by Jupicos Entertainment Private Limited.
"A party cannot ignore a termination and later challenge actions that follow it by seeking interim measures under the Arbitration Act," the court observed.
The case stems from a business arrangement related to the T20 Mumbai League, launched in February 2018 by the Mumbai Cricket Association (MCA). Probability Sports (India) Pvt. Ltd. was authorized to manage the league and invited bids for teams. A consortium including Juniper City Developers Ltd. and Cosmos Prime Projects Ltd. initially secured the Mumbai South Central team. Eventually, Jupicos was substituted as the successful bidder through a novation agreement dated 9 March 2018.
A participation agreement was signed between Jupicos and Probability Sports, allowing Jupicos to operate the "Shivaji Park Lions" team for the first five seasons of the league. Jupicos claimed losses despite a guaranteed income of ₹3.15 crore, which was allegedly returned to Probability Sports as participation fees. It further stated it incurred expenses of ₹5.61 crore but earned only ₹3.71 crore.
On 22 November 2019, Probability Sports issued a notice accusing Jupicos of defaulting ₹35.17 lakh as participation fees and failing to deposit TDS of ₹68.44 lakh for FY 2017–18 and 2018–19. Based on this, a termination notice was sent on 24 January 2020 under Clause 1(g) of a supplementary agreement, with MCA’s approval.
Jupicos did not challenge the termination immediately but instead indicated willingness to clear dues if its unpaid sponsorship claims were resolved. Despite this, Jupicos continued attending meetings until 2021 and made payments in January 2024. However, MCA stopped inviting Jupicos to meetings after April 2024. On 28 March 2025—just before a new auction—Jupicos filed an arbitration petition under Section 9 seeking interim relief to prevent MCA from assigning the team rights to third parties.
Jupicos argued that MCA's actions reflected that the termination had not been acted upon. It also cited unequal treatment by MCA compared to other team owners and claimed that creating third-party rights during a pending appeal was illegal.
However, the High Court rejected these arguments. It held that the agreements were between Jupicos and Probability Sports and did not establish any agency relationship with MCA. The contract was seen as a principal-to-principal arrangement, and the right to terminate rested with Probability Sports.
There is no evidence to show that MCA waived the termination or that the termination was not enforced, the court stated.
It also noted that the Single Judge had rightly observed the agreement only permitted Jupicos to operate the team and did not grant ownership or vested rights. Since Jupicos had not immediately disputed the termination and instead made dues payments much later, the court concluded that it had accepted the termination.
Further, the court found the arbitration petition to be delayed and strategically filed on the eve of the auction, which did not justify granting discretionary interim relief.
Read Also:-Bombay High Court Upholds Gang Rape Conviction, Says Woman’s Past Relationships Don’t Imply Consent
"Delay in seeking interim relief and participation post-termination do not establish the claim that the termination was ineffective," the bench observed.
Consequently, the court upheld the earlier decision and dismissed the appeal.
Case Title: Jupicos Entertainment Private Limited vs. Probability Sports (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Case Number: Arbitration Appeal (L) No. 12967 of 2025
Judgment Date: 7 May 2025
Senior Advocate Vivek Tankha, along with a team of advocates, represented the appellant. The respondents were represented by Senior Advocates Amrut Joshi and Ashish Kamat with their respective teams.
