On the petitioner's application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, the court referred the dispute arising from a rent agreement to arbitration, finding the existence of a valid arbitration clause and timely filing satisfied.
Dispute referred to Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) for arbitration.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~3
NARESH AGRAWAL .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Samakshi Garg, Adv.
versus
RAJESH NARANG .....Respondent
Through: None
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
%
O R D E R (ORAL) 07.08.2024
1. This is a petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 19961 for reference of the dispute between the parties to arbitration.
2. Despite service, there is no response on behalf of the respondent, nor is the respondent available when the matter is called out for hearing today.
3. I have heard Ms. Samakshi Garg, learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record.
4. The dispute arises in the context of a Rent Agreement executed between the parties and notarised on 21 September 2021. The Agreement contains the following clause, envisaging resolution of
1 “the 1996 Act”, hereinafter Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Page 1 of 3 By:CHANDRASHEKHARANHARI SHANKAR Signing Date: 08.0 8.2024 18:27:54
Digitally Signed By: AJIT KUMAR ARB.P. 930/2023 Signing Da te:0 8.08.2024 18:28:41
disputes by arbitration:
“15. That it has been agreed between the parties that in case of any dispute between the parties hereto arising out of this agreement or in relation thereto or with regard to the interpretation of this agreement shall be referred to the arbitrator and adjudicated and proceeded according to his rules and regulations, Further, the decision of arbitrator would be binding upon both the parties and the award passed after this arbitration proceedings shall be treated as a decree of court for the purpose execution and appeal”.
5. Disputes having arisen between the parties, the petitioner invoked the aforesaid clause and, by letter dated 5 April 2023, addressed to the respondent, sought reference of the dispute to arbitration.
6. There is no response from the respondent. The petitioner has approached this Court under Section 11(6) of the 1996 Act, seeking reference of the dispute to arbitration.
7. In a Section 11(6) petition, the Court is only required to satisfy itself that an arbitration agreement exists between the parties and that the Section 11(6) petition has been filed within three years of the Section 21 notice.
8. Both these requirements stand satisfied in the present case.
9. Accordingly, the disputes between the parties stand referred to arbitration by Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC), which would nominate a suitable arbitrator to arbitrate on the dispute between the parties.
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Page 2 of 3 By:CHANDRASHEKHARANHARI SHANKAR Signing Date: 08.0 8.2024 18:27:54
Digitally Signed By: AJIT KUMAR ARB.P. 930/2023 Signing Da te:0 8.08.2024 18:28:41
10. The arbitration would take place under the aegis of the DIAC and would abide by its rules and regulations.
11. The petition stands allowed in the aforesaid terms.
C. HARI SHANKAR, J
AUGUST 7, 2024 dsn
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
Signature Not Verified
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Page 3 of 3 By:CHANDRASHEKHARANHARI SHANKAR Signing Date: 08.0 8.2024 18:27:54
Digitally Signed By: AJIT KUMAR ARB.P. 930/2023 Signing Da te:0 8.08.2024 18:28:41
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court should refer the dispute to arbitration under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
NARESH AGRAWAL
RAJESH NARANG
C. HARI SHANKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
