Allowed

M/S. Weddingpark Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd. v. Balesh Devi Bhadana & Anr.

Delhi HC10 Dec 2024ARB.P./1361/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi constituted a sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate lease-related disputes. The petition was allowed following the undisputed existence of the arbitration agreement, with counter-claims to be pursued in arbitration.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Mr. Justice (Retd.) Rajiv Sahai Endlaw as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

M/S. Weddingpark Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd. Vs Balesh Devi Bhadana… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~13

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision : 10.12.2024

¶4

- ARB.P. 1361/2024

¶5

M/S. WEDDINGPARK HOSPITALITIES PVT. LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Puneet Jain (Sr. Adv.) along with Mr. Neelmani Pant, Mr. Shantanu Derghawen, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

BALESH DEVI BHADANA & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Abhijat (Sr. Adv.) along with Mr. Rohit Gandhi, Mr. Himanshu Anand, Mr. Hargun Singh Kalra, Ms. Akshita Nigam, Mr. Varun Trivedi, Mr. Harshvardhan Gulia, Mr. Hemant Anand, Advs.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

¶9

SACHIN DATTA, J. ( Oral )

¶10

The present petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeks constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

¶11

The disputes between the parties have arisen in the context of a registered Lease Deed dated 01.12.2017 entered into between the petitioner and the respondent no.1 whereby land admeasuring 67 Kanal, 14 Marla bearing Mustil No. 19, Killa No. 16 (0-10), 24 (2-13), 25(6-16), Mustil No. 20, Killa No. 4(6-8), 6(8-0), 6(7-17), 7(6-11), 13(0-9), 14(7-18), 15(6- 12), 18(6-0), Mustil No. 37, Killa no. 8/1(3-7), kita 16, business name as “Jannat

¶12

Signature Not Verified

¶13

ARB.P. 1361/2024 Page 1 of 3

¶14

Digitally Signed By:ROHIT KUMAR PATEL Signing Dat e:1 4.12.2024 23:19:25

¶15

Valley” situated at village Mewla Maharajpur, Tehsil Badhkal, District Faridabad was leased to the petitioner.

¶16

Disputes between the parties have arisen on account of alleged premature termination of the lease deed and alleged forcible taking over of the possession by the lessor/s.

¶17

Learned senior counsel for the respondent while strenuously controverting the version of the petitioner on the merits, does not dispute the existence of the Arbitration Agreement. He further submits that the respondents have certain counter-claims against the petitioner which the respondents are desirous of pursuing in the arbitration proceedings.

¶18

In the circumstances, since the existence of the Arbitration Agreement is undisputed, there is no impediment to constituting an Arbitral Tribunal to adjudicate the disputes between the parties, in terms of the legal position enunciated in In Re: Interplay between Arbitration Agreement under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 , 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1666 and SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Krish Spinning , 2024 INSC 532

¶19

Accordingly, Mr. Justice (Retd.) Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, Former Judge, Delhi High Court (Mob. No. +91 9717495002) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

¶20

The respondent shall be at liberty to raise preliminary objections as regards arbitrability/jurisdiction, if any, which shall be decided by the learned Sole Arbitrator, in accordance with law.

¶21

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

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

Digitally Signed By:ROHIT ARB.P. 1361/2024 Page 2 of 3 KUMAR PATEL Signing Dat e:1 4.12.2024 23:19:25

¶24

At request of respective counsel, it is directed that the arbitration shall take place under the aegis of and as per the Rules of Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC).

¶25

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.

¶26

Needless to say, nothing in this order shall be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case.

¶27

The petition is allowed in the above terms.

¶28

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶29

DECEMBER 10, 2024/uk

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Digitally Signed By:ROHIT ARB.P. 1361/2024 Page 3 of 3 KUMAR PATEL Signing Dat e:1 4.12.2024 23:19:25

M/S. Weddingpark Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd. v. Balesh Devi Bhadana & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Weddingpark Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd. v. Balesh Devi Bhadana & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. Vs Deepak and Anr.

Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. Vs Rukmini Satish Kumar and Anr.

Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. Vs Aarti Gupta and Anr.

Rajat Malhan & Anr. Vs Ms Anand Divine Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Ms Wedding Park Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd. Vs Balesh Devi Bhadana & Anr.

Exxonmobil Lubricants Private Limited Vs Asha Automine Private Limtied