Disposed

Sanjay Jain v. Kamal Verma

Delhi HC15 Apr 2024ARB.P./419/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, after the person named in the lease agreement declined to act due to acquaintance with the parties. The dispute concerned a lease agreement and non-payment of rent.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Justice Pratibha Rani (Retd.) as Sole Arbitrator.

Sanjay Jain Vs Kamal Verma — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~67

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

ARB.P. 419/2024

¶4

SANJAY JAIN ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mrs. Sukanya Choudhri, Adv. (M: 9811957306)

¶6

versus

¶7

KAMAL VERMA ..... Respondent

¶8

Through: Appearance not given.

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH O R D E R % 15.04.2024

¶10

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶11

This is a petition filed by the Petitioner-Sanjay Jain under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter, ‘the Act’) seeking appointment of an arbitrator in terms of the Lease Agreement dated 30th May, 2022.

¶12

The dispute between the parties relates to the subject property situated at ‘17-A, Bhogal Road, Bhogal, New Delhi-110014’ . Vide Lease Agreement dated 30th May, 2022, the first floor of the subject property, without terrace rights, was leased by the Petitioner, who is the landlord and owner, to the Respondent-Kamal Verma. The said lease is operational from 1st June, 2022 to 30th May, 2025. According to the Petitioner, the Respondent has been continuously defaulting on rent payments since 1st December, 2022. Consequently, the Petitioner terminated the tenancy vide legal notice dated 4th October 2023 and demanded vacant possession of the subject property by 31st October 2023. Furthermore, the Petitioner is also

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 23:52:21

¶14

seeking mesne profits and damages starting from 1st November 2023.

¶15

The said Lease Agreement also includes an arbitration clause i.e clause 13. Pursuant to this clause, the Petitioner approached the arbitrator, who, by vide letter dated 20th February 2024, declined to proceed as an arbitrator, as he is acquainted with both parties. In this context, the present arbitration petition has been filed.

¶16

Vide order 28th March, 2024, this Court issued notice in the present petition. Today, the Respondent has entered appearance and he is also present in person. It is his case that his brother is in possession of the subject property for the last twenty years. This position is disputed by ld. Counsel for the Petitioner, who submits that the dasti notice was received by Mr. Kamal Verma, in the subject premises, and that he has also paid rent for some time – so he is a tenant.

¶17

The arbitration clause - clause 13 of the Lease Agreement reads as

¶18

under:

¶19

“13. That in case of any dispute regarding the explanation/understanding of this Agreement Dr. Subhash Jain or Mr. Hemant Jain both residing Bhogal New Delhi shall be appointed as an Arbitrator and his decision shall be final and binding upon both the parties.”

¶20

The named arbitrator in the Lease Agreement has already declined from acting as an arbitrator in the matter. The letter dated 20th February, 2024 by the named arbitrator declining to act as an arbitrator reads as under:-

¶21

“Sanjay Jain 20.02.2024 60-62, Bhogal Road, Bhogal,

¶22

¶23

New Delhi-110014

¶24

Subject: Declining appointment as an Arbitrator I have received your letter calling upon me to act as an arbitrator in some dispute between you and Mr. Kamal Verma resident of 17-A, Bhogal, New Delhi pursuant to an arbitration agreement entered between you and him, with regard to the said property. I am acquainted with both the parties involved, which could compromise my ability to maintain impartiality and fairness in the case. I thus decline the appointment as arbitrator in this matter.”

¶25

As per the report of the Registry, Mr. Kamal Verma was served on 8th April, 2024, and Mr. Kamal accepted the dasti notice.

¶26

In view of this position, Justice Pratibha Rani (Retd) (9910384626) , is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator in this matter to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The arbitration shall take place under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre ( ‘DIAC’ ). The fee of the ld. Sole Arbitrator shall be paid in terms of the 4^th Schedule of the Act as amended by DIAC Rules, 2023.

¶27

The ld. Sole Arbitrator shall enter reference on 8th May, 2024.

¶28

Let a copy of the present order be emailed to Secretary, DIAC on email id- [email protected].

¶29

The petition is disposed of. All pending applications are also disposed of.

¶30

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

¶31

APRIL 15, 2024 dj/dn

¶32

Sanjay Jain v. Kamal Verma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Jain v. Kamal Verma

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

Vikas Chander Vs State and Ors.

Canon India Pvt. Limited Vs Sumit Digital Prints through Its Proprietor Mr Amit Kasana

Pankaj Mittal Vs Union of India

M.K. Industries Vs Northern Railways

Sterling and Wilson Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mata Amritanandamayi Math

M/S Swastik Oil Products Manufacturing Navsari Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and Ors.