Disposed

Foxymorom Media Solutions Private Limited v. Workamp Spaces Private Limited

Bombay HC28 Mar 2024ARBAP/1/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought appointment of a sole arbitrator to recover the unpaid balance of a Rs.72 lakh refundable security deposit paid under a co-working space Membership Agreement. Respondent claimed amounts received were full and final settlement. Court appointed Advocate Shrey Sancheti as sole Arbitrator per Clause 9.8, leaving contentions open.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Advocate Shrey Sancheti as sole arbitrator to resolve disputes under the Membership Agreement's arbitration clause; all contentions left open.

Foxymorom Media Solutions Private Limited vs Workamp Spaces… — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1/4 22 ARBAP-1-24.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.01 OF 2024

¶3

Foxymoron Media Solutions Private .. Applicant Limited

¶4

Versus

¶5

Workamp Spaces Private Limited .. Respondent

¶6

Mr.Harsh Sheth i/b MDP & Partners for the Applicant. Mr.Romin Sangoi i/b IC Legal for the Respondent.

¶7

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 28^th MARCH, 2024

¶8

P.C:-

¶9

A Membership Agreement dated 25/04/2018, where the Respondent-Workamp Spaces Private Limited had agreed to provide access to the co-working/offce space to the ApplicantFoxymoron Media Solutions Private Limited, since the former, pursuant to the Leave and Licence Agreement with Marathon Futurex, had set up co-working space in its premises, provided for resolution of disputes through the mode of arbitration.

¶10

The aforesaid Agreement entitled the Applicant to the exclusive access to the co-working offce space and to receive the service and benefts set out therein for a consideration and on such terms and conditions recorded thereunder.

¶11

M.M.Salgaonkar

¶12

2/4 22 ARBAP-1-24.odt

¶13

The contract was for a period of ffty seven (57) months, which was to expire on 30/04/2023, with a lock-in period of 24 months. The Applicant paid an interest free refundable security deposit of Rs.72,00,000/- and in terms of Clause No.3.1, Workamp was liable to refund the deposit within thirty days, after the termination/expiration of the contract and the date on which, the necessary information was provided.

¶14

It is the case of the Applicant that it continued to avail the benefts under the Agreement until 13/03/2020. However, during the Covid pandemic, it was unable to do so. Despite this, membership fee was paid until 30/07/2020 i.e. for the balance period and until the expiry of lock-in period and, thereafter, the contract was terminated by it, by giving one month’s notice. Though the membership fees was paid, it sought refund of the security deposit in the wake of the provision in the Agreement.

¶15

As per the Applicant, an amount of Rs.30,00,000/- is received in three tranches i.e. (a) Rs.20,00,000/- on 21/01/2021 (b) Rs.5,00,000/- on 17/02/2021 and Rs.5,00,000/- on 10/03/2021.

¶16

The notice invoking arbitration also admit that further sum of Rs.15,00,000/- was received on 21/10/2021, leaving the balance amount of Rs.27,00,000/- which is due and payable with 18% interest, which was worked out as Rs.39,02,351/-.

¶17

The learned counsel for the Respondent would oppose the appointment of the Arbitrator, by submitting, that the

¶18

M.M.Salgaonkar

¶19

3/4 22 ARBAP-1-24.odt

¶20

entire amount is received by the Applicant towards full and fnal settlement, but he is unable to satisfy me, by pointing out any document that the Applicant accepted the amount of Rs.30,00,000/-+Rs.15,00,000/-, as full and fnal settlement under any of its written communication.

¶21

The notice invoking arbitration staked a claim of Rs.39,02,351/-, which is the balance amount of the entire security deposit of Rs.72,00,000/-.

¶22

In any case, if there is any dispute, which is existing between the parties, in the wake of the arbitration clause comprised in the Agreement, executed between them and, in specifc, clause No.9.8, the dispute must go to arbitration. It is open for the Arbitrator to rule upon the point of ‘accord and sanction’, if at all raised by the Respondent.

¶23

Since the existence of the arbitration clause and its invocation is not in dispute and the Applicant is desirous of balance of the security amount deposited, though a part of it is refunded, the Sole Arbitrator, in terms of Clause No.9.8, shall resolve the dispute between the parties.

¶24

In the wake of the above, Advocate Shrey Sancheti is appointed as a sole Arbitrator to decide the disputes and differences between the parties under the document referred to above. The details of the appointed Arbitrator are as below :-

¶25

Name of the Arbitrator :- Advocate Shrey Sancheti (Chambers of Mr.Zal Andhyarujina)

¶26

M.M.Salgaonkar

¶27

	4/4	22 ARBAP-1-24.odt
Address	:-	Mistry Mansion, 107, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Mumbai -400 001
Email ID	:-	[email protected]
Contact No.	:-	+91 9833694018

¶28

The Arbitrator, within a period of 15 days before entering the arbitration reference, shall forward a statement of disclosure as per the requirement of Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court, to be placed on record of this application

¶29

The Arbitrator, after entering the reference, shall fx the date of hearing and issue further directions, as are necessary.

¶30

The sole Arbitrator shall be entitled to the fees prescribed under the Bombay High Court (Fee Payable to Arbitrators) Rules, 2018 and the arbitral costs and fees of the Arbitrator shall be borne by the parties in equal portion and shall be subject to the fnal Award that may be passed by the Tribunal.

¶31

Needless to state that all the contentions of both the sides are left open, to be raised by the respective parties before the Arbitral Tribunal, in accordance with law.

¶32

With the aforesaid direction, the Arbitration Application stands disposed off.

¶33

( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

¶34

M.M.Salgaonkar

Foxymorom Media Solutions Private Limited v. Workamp Spaces Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Foxymorom Media Solutions Private Limited v. Workamp Spaces Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Goqii Technologies Private Limited vs Sokrati Technologies Private Limited

Chetan Shahaji Jadhav Vs State of Maharashtra

Anjali Hotels Private Limited through Its Authorized Signatory T. R. Jubee Vs Airport Authority of India, Pune

Mumbai Shahar Berojgar Seva Sahakari Sanstha Federation Limited vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (Mcgm)

Sanjusha Khan and Anr. vs Sajid Khan and 5 Ors.

Hindustan Unilever Limited vs Fabs Industries