Partly allowed

Sony India Pvt. Ltd. v. Ajit Singh Chadha

Delhi HC30 Jul 2018O.M.P. (COMM)/92/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi modified an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to limit the petitioner's liability for lease rental till 31.12.2015, with parties' consent, and directed payment within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Modified the award to limit liability to lease rental till 31.12.2015; directed payment within four weeks.

Sony India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ajit Singh Chadha — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~39

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- O.M.P. (COMM) 92/2018 & IA No. 2700/2018

¶4

SONY INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Rahul Malhotra, Mr.Varun Garg & Mr.Chinmayee Chandra, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

AJIT SINGH CHADHA ..... Respondent Through: Mr.J.P. Sengh, Sr. Adv. with Mr.D. Ashok Rajagopalan, Ms.Sana Ansari & Ms.Manisha Mehta, Advs.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 30.07.2018

¶10

This petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Award dated 17.10.2017 passed by the Sole Arbitrator adjudicating the disputes that have arisen between the parties in relation to the Lease Deed dated 08.06.2011 as renewed on 24.07.2014.

¶11

The only grievance of the petitioner is with respect to the direction of the Sole Arbitrator directing the petitioner to make payment of the lease rental to the respondent uptil May 2016.

¶12

After making detailed submissions, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the Award be modified to the limited extent that the petitioner is made liable to pay the lease rental till 31.12.2015. Though the learned senior counsel for the respondent had some reservations on the

¶13

same, he submits that if the payment of the awarded amount is made within a period of four weeks, he would have no objection to such modification of the Impugned Award.

¶14

With the consent of the parties, the Award is modified to the limited extent that the petitioner under Claim no. 1, 2 and 12 is held liable to pay the lease rental to the respondent till 31.12.2015. The other directions contained in the Impugned Award shall remain. The interest awarded under the Impugned Award shall be re-worked taking into account this modification of the Award. The amount liable to be paid under the Award as modified hereinabove, shall be paid by the petitioner to the respondent within a period of four weeks from today. Incase the amount as directed in this order is not paid, the Impugned Award shall be revived making the petitioner liable to make payment in terms thereof.

¶15

The petition is disposed of with the above direction and with no order as to cost.

¶16

NAVIN CHAWLA, J

¶17

JULY 30, 2018/ rv

Sony India Pvt. Ltd. v. Ajit Singh Chadha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sony India Pvt. Ltd. v. Ajit Singh Chadha

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

Bridge and Roof Co. (India) Ltd. Vs Guru Gobind Singh Indraprasth University & Anr.

M/S Naina Construction Co. Vs Dataram Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd.

Ms Shoes East Ltd. Vs Aasheesh Goel &·Co.

Ajit Singh Chadha Vs Sony India Pvt. Ltd.

Jagtar Singh Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation

Knr Walayar Tollways Private Limited Vs National Highways Authority of India