Disposed

Goverdhan Transport Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Government of NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC15 Jul 2024O.M.P.(I) (COMM.)/199/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order refers disputes between transport concessionaires and the Delhi Government arising from Concession Agreements to arbitration. The court directed the proceedings to be treated as independent and fixed the arbitrator's remuneration per the Act.

What did the court decide?

Dispute referred to arbitration of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kailash Gambhir; proceedings treated as independent.

Goverdhan Transport Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~43 to 45

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 197/2024 & I.A. 31695/2024 METRO TRANSIT PVT. LTD .....Petitioner versus

¶4

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent

¶5

- O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 198/2024 & I.A. 31696/2024 ANTONY ROAD TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD .....Petitioner versus

¶6

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent

¶7

- O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 199/2024 & I.A. 31697/2024 GOVERDHAN TRANSPORT CO PVT LTD .....Petitioner versus

¶8

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent

¶9

Appearance: Mr. Sushil Dutt Salwan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Aditya Garg and Mr. Arjun Garg, Advocates for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Sameer Vashisht, ASC GNCTD with Ms. Harshita Nathrani and Mr. Vedansh Vashisht, Advocates.

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

% 15.07.2024

¶14

O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 197/2024 and connected matters

¶15

Page 1 of 4

¶16

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 03/07/2025 at 04:09:16

¶17

The petitioners have approached this Court under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [“the Act”], for interim measures of protection in anticipation of arbitral proceedings under separate Concession Agreements dated 20.06.2013 [“the Agreements”].

¶18

The Agreements essentially provided for the petitioners to induct buses for public transport in Delhi, subject to the terms and conditions contained therein. Although the term of the Agreements was for a period of ten years, it is the contention of the petitioners that the respondent belatedly provided the necessary infrastructure for induction of the buses, as a result of which, the buses were inducted only in a staggered manner. The petitioners contend that the tenure of the Agreement has to be computed accordingly.

¶19

It appears that the parties were unable to achieve consensus on this issue and the petitioners therefore invoked arbitration by communications dated 30.05.2024.

¶20

The petitioners have approached this Court for the following reliefs:

¶21

“ (i) extend the validity of the permits of the buses, which expire, till the last bus inducted in the fleet completes 10 years of operation;

¶22

(ii) continue to schedule Petitioner's buses, subject to bus being road worthy till all the buses in Petitioner's fleet have completed 10 years of operations to ensure co-terminus of the entire fleet;

¶23

(iii) Such other relief that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in favour of the parties. ”

¶24

By an interim order dated 10.06.2024, the Court extended the petitioners’ permits until 15.07.2024.

¶25

The respondent has filed replies to the petitions, copies whereof

¶26

O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 197/2024 and connected matters

¶27

Page 2 of 4

¶28

¶29

have been handed over in Court and are taken on record. In the replies, it has been stated that the respondent has, by order dated 14.06.2024, extended the concession period “ initially for an additional period of 9 (nine) months from 16.07.2024 to 15.04.2024 ”, subject to the conditions contained therein.

¶30

In view of the above, Mr. Sushil Dutt Salwan, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Sameer Vashisht, learned counsel for the respondent, submit that no further orders are required in these petitions under Section 9 of the Act.

¶31

Learned counsel for the parties, however, submit that arbitration proceedings under the same Agreements, albeit with regard to a different dispute, are pending before Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kailash Gambhir, former Judge of this Court. They jointly request that disputes which are subject matter of the present petitions, be referred to arbitration in these proceedings itself, and the same learned Arbitrator be appointed.

¶32

At the request of learned counsel for the parties, it is directed that disputes between the parties under the Concession Agreements dated 20.06.2013, which form subject matter of the present petitions, are also referred to arbitration of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kailash Gambhir, former Judge of this Court [Tel: 9871300033]. The parties may place their respective statements of claims and counter-claims, if any, before the learned Arbitrator, in addition to any applications under Section 17 of the Act, if necessary.

¶33

The learned Arbitrator is requested to furnish a declaration under Section 12 of the Act, prior to entering upon the reference.

¶34

These proceedings will be treated as independent proceedings for

¶35

O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 197/2024 and connected matters

¶36

Page 3 of 4

¶37

¶38

all purposes, and the remuneration of the learned Arbitrator will be fixed in terms of Schedule IV of the Act.

¶39

The petitions, alongwith pending applications, are disposed of in terms aforesaid, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties in the proposed arbitral proceedings.

¶40

PRATEEK JALAN, J

¶41

JULY 15, 2024 SS/

¶42

O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 197/2024 and connected matters

¶43

Page 4 of 4

¶44

Goverdhan Transport Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Government of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Goverdhan Transport Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Government of NCT of Delhi

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

Mintellectuals LLP Vs Lava International Limited

Gurdev Singh Vs Ms Bptp Limited

Nilesh Patel Vs Ms Bptp Limited

Quatrro Global Services Private Limited Vs Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited

Colliers International India Property Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Iris Tech Park Facility Management Services

B.K.Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. Vs Rathi Tmt Saria Pvt. Ltd.