The Delhi High Court disposed of a petition for interim measures of protection under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, after the parties agreed disputes were settled. As no interim relief was sought, the petition was dismissed without prejudice to pending proceedings.
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.
$~23
SANHITA AGNIHOTRI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Deepak Vohra, Advocate
versus
PRAKASH CHANDRA GUWALANI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Piyush Wadhwa, Advocate for R-1
Mr. Imran Ali, Advocate for R-4
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
O R D E R % 13.09.2024
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 300/2022 Page 1 of 2
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 17/09/2024 at 11:54:38
amounts remain to be paid.
PRATEEK JALAN, J
SEPTEMBER 13, 2024
‘sv’/
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 300/2022 Page 2 of 2
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 17/09/2024 at 11:54:38
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to grant interim measures of protection in anticipation of arbitral proceedings under a lease deed when a settlement agreement has been executed.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Sanhita Agnihotri
Prakash Chandra Guwalani & Ors.
Prateek Jalan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
