Allowed

Sh. Raj Kamal Singh & Ors. v. Abhay Kalra

Delhi HC9 Aug 2016ARB.P./73/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order discharged the court's duty to appoint a sole arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, following a confirmed arbitration agreement in a lease deed and a dismissal of a civil suit on arbitrability grounds. The court found a dispute existed despite the respondent's objection.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Mr. Brajesh Kumar, ADJ (Retired) as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.

Sh. Raj Kamal Singh & Ors. Vs Abhay Kalra — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~2

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 73/2016

¶4

SH. RAJ KAMAL SINGH & ORS.

¶5

..... Petitioners

¶6

Through: Mr Swaran Kamal Singh, Adv

¶7

versus

¶8

ABHAY KALRA

¶9

..... Respondent Through: Ms Seema Singh, Adv

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

% 09.08.2016

¶14

This is a petition for appointment of an arbitrator. There is no dispute that there exists an arbitration agreement between the Petitioners and the Respondent.

¶15

The learned counsel for the Petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to the Lease Deed dated 02.09.2010 executed between the parties. Clause 31 of the said lease deed reads as under:-

¶16

"That both the parties agreed to refer their dispute and difference in connection with the Lease Deed to Arbitrational Tribunal."

¶17

The Learned Counsel for the Petitioners has also drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 11.12.2015 passed by the District Judge - West District, Delhi whereby the Civil Suit filed by the Petitioners for recovery of `5,78,547/- along with further interest was dismissed at the instance of the Respondents. The said order indicates that the Respondents had taken the stand that the suit was not maintainable in view of the Clause

¶18

31 of the Lease Deed, which contained an arbitration agreement. This contention was accepted by the District Judge and the said Court came to the conclusion that there exists an arbitration agreement between the parties.

¶19

In reply to the present petition, the Respondent has not disputed the arbitration agreement, but has contended that there is no dispute between the parties. Clearly, the said stand is not sustainable.

¶20

Accordingly, Mr Brajesh Kumar, ADJ (Retired) (Mobile No.9968139955), is appointed as sole arbitrator to adjudicate upon the dispute between the parties. The fees of the arbitrator shall be fixed in terms of Schedule IV of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶21

The Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶22

Copy of this order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the parties and a copy thereof be communicated to the arbitrator forthwith.

¶23

VIBHU BAKHRU, J

¶24

AUGUST 09, 2016 M

Sh. Raj Kamal Singh & Ors. v. Abhay Kalra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sh. Raj Kamal Singh & Ors. v. Abhay Kalra

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

Similar cases

Narender Kumar Rajgharhia Vs Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. & Ors.

P.J. Banan Vs Moser Baer India Limited

M/S Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs M/S Aaui Service Station Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Magma Fincorp Ltd. Vs Satish Kumar & Anr.

Magma Fincorp Limtied Vs Vindo Kumar & Ors.

Emr Chowdary Vs Engineering Projects (India) Limited