Disposed

Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd. v. M/S Janajal Yatrigana LLP

Delhi HC29 Jan 2024ARB.P./901/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court disposed of a petition under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an arbitrator. The Court appointed Justice Deepa Sharma as the arbitrator, fixed her remuneration, and directed parties to approach her within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Justice Deepa Sharma as arbitrator; direction to parties to approach her within two weeks.

Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd. Vs M/S… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~5

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

ARB.P. 901/2023 INDIAN RAILWAY CATERING AND TOURISM CORPORATION LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajat Malhotra, Adv. (VC) with Ms. Madhu Kumari, Ms. Dipita, Advs.

¶4

versus

¶5

M/S JANAJAL YATRIGANA LLP ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Usman G. Khan, Adv.

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 29.01.2024

¶10

The present petition has been filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes inter se the parties.

¶11

The petitioner issued a Letter of award/tender document dated 02.01.2017 to the respondent. The tender document in clause- 10.1 contains the arbitration clause with the seat at New Delhi which reads as follows;

¶12

10.1 In the event of any dispute or difference arising under these conditions of Licence or in connection with this Licence (except as to any matters, the decision of which is specifically provided for by these or the special conditions) the same will be resolved by Arbitration, as per the provisions of "The Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. The venue of the Arbitration shall be Delhi All questions, disputes and or differences arising under or in connection with this agreement or in touching or relating to or

¶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 02/07/2025 at 00:12:58

¶14

concerning the construction, or affect of presents (excepts as to matters the decision whereof is other-wise herein before, expressly provided for) shall be referred to the sole arbitration of the officer/officers or persons nominated by the Managing Director/IRCTC whose decision in this regard shall be binding on the Licensee.

¶15

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that an independent arbitrator may be appointed subject to the contentions to be raised by the respondent during the course of the arbitration proceedings.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that though as per the tender document, the arbitrator is to be appointed by the Managing Director, IRCTC. However, in view of the Perkins Eastman Architects DPC & Anr. v. HSCC (India) Limited 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1517, the petitioner has moved to Court for the appointment of an independent arbitrator.

¶17

Considering that both the parties have consented to the reference to the arbitral tribunal, the present petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶18

i) The disputes between the parties under the said agreement are referred to the arbitral tribunal.

¶19

ii) As agreed by both the counsels for the parties, Justice Ms. Deepa Sharma, Former Judge, Delhi High Court is appointed as an arbitrator in the present matter to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

¶20

iii) The remuneration of the learned Arbitrator shall be fixed with the consent of the parties.

¶21

iv) The learned Arbitrator is requested to furnish a declaration in

¶22

¶23

terms of Section 12 of the Act before entering into the reference. v) It is made clear that all the rights and contentions of the parties, including as to the arbitrability of any of the claims, any other preliminary objection, as well as claims on merits of the dispute of either of the parties, are left open for adjudication by the learned arbitrator.

¶24

vi) The parties shall approach the learned arbitrator within two weeks from today.

¶25

The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶26

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J

¶27

JANUARY 29, 2024 Pallavi

¶28

Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd. v. M/S Janajal Yatrigana LLP

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd. v. M/S Janajal Yatrigana LLP

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

Dlf Home Developers Ltd. Vs Amit Arora

Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Pramod Chauhan

Rajesh Kumar Pasricha Vs Splendor Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Al Quraishi Marketing Co. Limited Vs Krbl Limited

Arunima Automobiles through Its Partners Sudhakar Sinha and Praveer Sinha Vs Maruti Udyog Limited Now Maruti Suzuki Indian Limited

Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd. Vs M/S Janajal Yatrigana LLP