Dismissed

Ahlcon Parenterals (India) Ltd. v. Scan Biotech Ltd. & Ors.

Delhi HC17 Jan 2019ARB.P./28/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court held arbitration petition inadmissible in Delhi HC as respondents are foreign companies invoking international commercial arbitration scheme. Granted liberty to move appropriate forum for arbitrator appointment while encouraging parties to utilize Delhi High Court Mediation Centre.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to move appropriate forum for arbitrator appointment granted; may approach Delhi High Court Mediation Centre.

Ahlcon Parenterals (India) Ltd. Vs Scan Biotech Ltd. & Ors. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~21

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 28/2019

¶4

AHLCON PARENTERALS (INDIA) LTD. ..... Petitioner Through Dr. B.K. Dash and Mr. Alok Kumar, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

SCAN BIOTECH LTD. & ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Ajay Verma and Ms. Katyaini, Advs. for R-1. Counsel for R-2 & 3 (appearance not given)

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

¶9

O R D E R % 17.01.2019

¶10

I.A. 655/2019

¶11

Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

¶12

ARB.P. 28/2019

¶13

Apart from anything else, it is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that respondents no.2 and 3 are companies incorporated outside India.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner says that respondents no.1 to 3 are run and managed by the same individuals.

¶15

3.1 To be noted, this aspect is denied by the counsel for respondents no.2 and 3.

¶16

However, in view of the fact that respondents no.2 and 3 are the companies incorporated outside India, this will bring the matter within the ARB.P. 28/2019 Page 1 of 2

¶17

purview of an ‘international commercial arbitration’ as defined in Section 2(1)(f) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶18

4.1 Consequently, the petition would not lie in this Court.

¶19

4.2 The same is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶20

4.3 The petitioner will, however, have the liberty to move the appropriate forum for appointment of an Arbitrator.

¶21

At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent

¶22

no.1 say that they would like to take the assistance of the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre (in short ‘Centre’) for attending a settlement qua their inter se disputes.

¶23

In my view, there is no impediment in the parties taking assistance of the Centre before embarking on litigation.

¶24

Accordingly, if parties approach the Centre, it would take the necessary steps in that behalf to facilitate mediation between them.

¶25

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

¶26

JANUARY 17, 2019 rb

¶27

Page 2 of 2

¶28

ARB.P. 28/2019

Ahlcon Parenterals (India) Ltd. v. Scan Biotech Ltd. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ahlcon Parenterals (India) Ltd. v. Scan Biotech Ltd. & Ors.

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

Purearth Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs Kamal Arora & Anr.

M/S Aadhar Stumb Township Ltd. Vs New Delhi Municipal Council

Dr. Rahul Chawla Vs Galgotia Publications Pvt. Ltd.

Engineering Projects (India) Ltd. Vs Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University

National Highways Authority of India Vs Vil Rohtak Jind Highway Private Limited

Ishi Khosla Vs Sharnarthi Finance Ltd.