Allowed

Manu Raj Bhalla v. Spire Techpark Private Ltd.

Delhi HC18 Oct 2024ARB.P./1157/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator. Respondent consented to the appointment. Court appointed an arbitrator.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Ms. Shreya Vedantika Mehra as Sole Arbitrator.

What the court decided

Manu Raj Bhalla Vs Spire Techpark Private Ltd. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~10

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision : 18.10.2024

¶4

- ARB.P. 1157/2024

¶5

MANU RAJ BHALLA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dhruv Gautam, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

SPIRE TECHPARK PRIVATE LTD .....Respondent Through: Ms. Nistha Gupta and Mr. Anuj Panwar, Advocates.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

¶10

SACHIN DATTA, J. ( ORAL )

¶11

The present petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the A&C Act”) seeks appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. 2. The petitioner made an application to the respondent company for allotment of space/unit in its project and in furtherance of the said application, an agreement dated 24.01.2011 was executed between the parties, whereby, the petitioner acquired the leasehold rights to space/unit measuring 500 square feet in Information Technology Park named “SpireTec” at Plot No. TZ-13A, Sector Tech Zone, GNIDA, Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P. valid till 31.12.2096.

¶12

Pursuant to the said agreement, the respondent offered notional possession of units to the petitioner on 01.08.2015 in the project which was now renamed from “SpireTec” to “World Trade Center, Noida”.

¶13

Signature Not Verified

¶14

ARB.P. 1157/2024 Page 1 of 4

¶15

Digitally Signed By:KAMLA RAWAT Signing Da te:2 8.10.2024 23:55:13

¶16

Thereafter, a Deed of Accession dated 30.06.2015 was executed between the petitioner and IL & FS Trust Company Limited, whereby, the right to rent out the units as well as the right to receive the rent on the petitioner’s behalf was assumed by the Trust named “FL02TEC2 TRUST”, and IL & FS Trust Company Limited was appointed the Trustee .

¶17

Subsequent to the said Deed of Accession, a Tripartite Sub-Lease Deed dated 24.05.2016 was executed between Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA) as the ‘Lessor’, M/s. Sundaram I. T. Parks Private Limited as ‘Lessee’ which was represented by the authorized signatory of the respondent company, and the petitioner as the “sub-lessee”, whereby, the Petitioner became the registered owner of unit nos. T2- R- 0212A on floor no. FL02 in tower Tec-2 at Plot No. TZ-13A, Sector Tech Zone, GNIDA, Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶18

Subsequently, a Memorandum of Understanding (‘MoU’) was executed between the petitioner and the respondent, whereby, the respondent undertook to pay to the petitioner “Commitment Charges” to the tune of Rs.40/- per square foot with effect from 01.08.2015 till 31.07.2018 i.e., for a period of 36 months.

¶19

The disputes between the parties have arisen with regard to the entitlement of the petitioner to receive rent from the respondent. Disputes have also arisen on account of certain demands being raised by the respondent on the petitioner.

¶20

Admittedly, the MoU between the parties contains a dispute resolution clause as under :-

¶21

"Article 9 Dispute Resolution

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

ARB.P. 1157/2024 Page 2 of 4

¶24

Digitally Signed By:KAMLA RAWAT Signing Da te:2 8.10.2024 23:55:13

¶25

9.1 Rights and obligations of parties arising from or concerning this MOU shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of India.

¶26

9.2 In case of any dispute between the parties hereto (including their successors) concerning this MOU or matters arising there from, same shall be adjudicated by way of arbitration, which shall be conducted by an arbitrator nominated / appointed by developer. Arbitration shall be held at New Delhi.

¶27

9.3 Subject to arbitration clause, for all legal matters between the developer and allottee, Courts/Tribunals/Forums at New Delhi shall have the exclusive jurisdiction. "

¶28

Learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute the existence of the arbitration agreement between the parties. She accedes to the appointment of an independent sole Arbitrator by this Court to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

¶29

Accordingly, with the consent of the parties, Ms. Shreya Vedantika Mehra, Advocate (Mob. No. +91 9910027557) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

¶30

The learned Sole Arbitrator may proceed with the arbitration proceedings, subject to furnishing to the parties, requisite disclosures as required under Section 12 of the A&C Act.

¶31

The learned Sole Arbitrator shall be entitled to fee in accordance with the IVth Schedule of the A&C Act; or as may otherwise be agreed to between the parties and the learned Sole Arbitrator.

¶32

The parties shall share the arbitrator’s fee and arbitral cost, equally.

¶33

Signature Not Verified

¶34

ARB.P. 1157/2024 Page 3 of 4

¶35

Digitally Signed By:KAMLA RAWAT Signing Da te:2 8.10.2024 23:55:13

¶36

All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the claims/counter claims are kept open, to be decided by the learned Sole Arbitrator on their merits, in accordance with law.

¶37

Needless to say, nothing in this order shall be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the controversy between the parties. All rights and contentions of the parties in this regard are reserved. 16. The present petition is allowed in the above terms.

¶38

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶39

OCTOBER 18, 2024/ r, sv

¶40

Signature Not Verified

¶41

Digitally Signed ARB.P. 1157/2024 Page 4 of 4 By:KAMLA RAWAT Signing Da te:2 8.10.2024 23:55:13

Manu Raj Bhalla v. Spire Techpark Private Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Manu Raj Bhalla v. Spire Techpark Private Ltd.

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

Leisure Builder Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shanti Swarup Bhadana

Kotak Mahindra Prime Limited Vs Nikhil Jain

Ms Inam and Co. Vs Airport Authority of India & Ors.

Extramarks Education India Pvt. Ltd. Vs G D Goenka Public School & Anr.

Mukesh Kumar Srivastav Vs Spire Techpark Private Limited

Prithvi Raj Vs Spire Techpark Private Limited