Allowed

B2B Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. v. Ths Leisure Entertainment Pvt. Ltd.

Kerala HC24 Nov 2021AR/18/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Arbitration reference filed by B2B Hospitality Pvt Ltd for appointment of arbitrator in a dispute with respondents under an agreement containing an arbitration clause. Court noted respondents were absent and notices returned. Court allowed reference and appointed sole arbitrator ex parte.

What did the court decide?

Arbitration request allowed; Sri. A.K. Haridas appointed as sole arbitrator; parties directed to appear before arbitrator on 15.12.2021.

B2B Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ths Leisure Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. — Arbitration | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶5

AR NO. 18 OF 2021

¶6

APPLICANT:

¶7

B2B HOSPITALITY PVT. LTD. PLOT NO. 94, 2ND FLOOR, BLOCK B, POCKET 10, SECTOR 13, NEAR RADISSON HOTEL, DWARKA, NEW DELHI 110075, REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. LATE MADAN MOHAN SINGH.

¶8

BY ADVS. K.N.ABHILASH SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THS LEISURE ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD. 52/3168 A, SREEVALSAM BUILDING, NH-47, BYPASS VYTILLA (PO), KOCHI, KERALA 682 019, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SREEJITH.R.,

¶11

2 SREEJITH R, AGED 32 YEARS S/O. RANJITH KUMAR, PONNUS SREE HOUSE, KOORAMBALA VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 691 523.

¶12

3 DEEPU KRISHNAN, AGED 32 YEARS S/O. GOPALARISHNAM, MATTATHUTHU HOUSE, POODIKADU KARA, KOORAMBALA VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 691 523.

¶13

THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.11.2021,

¶14

THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

AR NO. 18 OF 2021

¶16

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

The petitioner, which is stated to be a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, has approached this Court, invoking jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short), specifically alleging that they and the respondents had entered into Annexure A3 agreement, but that various disputes have now arisen with respect to and relating to its terms.

¶19

2 . According to the petitioner, the arbitration clause in Annexure A3 agreement mandates that all disputes arising from its terms or relating to it, shall only be adjudicated and resolved through the process of Arbitration; and therefore, that they issued several communications to the respondents to accede to their claims or agree to subject the disputes to Arbitration. They say that since the respondents did not respond to any such communication, they were forced to issue Annexure A8 legal notice to the 2 nd respondent, who is the Managing Director of the 1 st respondent – Company, nominating a particular Advocate as the sole Arbitrator and requesting him to accede to it. They say that, however, even this was not accepted by the respondents; thus constraining them to approach this Court through this Arbitration Request.

¶20

AR NO. 18 OF 2021

¶21

¶22

3 . I notice from the files that even though notices were issued to the respondents several times, they were all returned with the endorsements 'left' or 'addressee out of India'. The petitioner, thereafter sought permission of this Court to take out notice to respondents through E-mail, as available in the Master data maintained in the website of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs; and a Memo dated 11.10.2021 has been filed on record, indicating that same has been completed.

¶23

4 . However, even today, there is no appearance for the respondents, nor have they chosen to appear in person.

¶24

5 . I have examined Annexure A3, which is the agreement in question and it is specifically mandated therein that 'if any disputes or differences shall arise between the parties to touching these presents or any claim or any subsisting statutory modification, the venue of such arbitration shall be at Cochin.' (sic)

¶25

6 . It is thus indubitable that the parties have contractually committed themselves to the process of Arbitration, in the event of arising of disputes relating to the said agreement.

¶26

7 . I am, therefore, of the firm view that this Court is now obligated to allow this Arbitration Request and to appoint a sole independent Arbitrator.

¶27

AR NO. 18 OF 2021

¶28

¶29

Resultantly, this Arbitration Request is allowed in the following manner:

¶30

(a) I nominate Sri.A.K.Haridas, K/654/1997, Mayookham, Manakkaparambu Road, Edappally PO , as the sole Arbitrator, to adjudicate and resolve the disputes and differences between the parties to this case arising from Annexure A3 agreement.

¶31

(b) The Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator within a period of two weeks from today and to obtain a Statement of Disclosure from him under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶32

(c) Once the Disclosure Statement is obtained from the learned Arbitrator, the Registry shall release the certified copy of this order, with a copy of the said statement appended to it, retaining the original of the same on the files of this case.

¶33

(d) The fees of the Arbitrator shall be governed by the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶34

(e) The parties to this case are ad idem that they will share the arbitration costs and fees equally and it is so recorded.

¶35

(f) In order to enable the Arbitrator to commence the

¶36

AR NO. 18 OF 2021

¶37

¶38

proceedings without delay, I direct the parties to mark appearance before him at 11.00 am on 15.12.2021.

¶39

Since the respondents are remaining ex parte in this proceedings, the learned Arbitrator shall notify them of this date, or a future date, appropriately.

¶40

SD/-

¶41

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

¶42

¶43

AR NO. 18 OF 2021

¶44

¶45

APPENDIX OF AR 18/2021

¶46

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

¶47

ANNEXURE A1	TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS DATED 06.06.2018.
ANNEXURE A2	TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF SUMMARY OF ACCOUNT OF APPLICANT COMPANY AS ON 03.08.2018.
ANNEXURE A3	TRUE COPY OF AGREEMENT DATED 29/06/2018 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE RESPONDENTS.
ANNEXURE A4	TRUE COPY OF EMAIL DATED 01/08/2018 ISSUED BY THE APPLICANT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A5	TRUE COPY OF INVOICE DATED 01/08/2018 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO APPLICANT.
ANNEXURE A6	TRUE COPY OF EMAIL DATED 02/08/2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO APPLICANT.
ANNEXURE A7	TRUE COPY OF FIR DATED 18/01/2019 OF MARADU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
ANNEXURE A8	TRUE COPY OF ARBITRATION NOTICE DATED 07/10/2020 ISSUED BY THE COUNSEL FOR APPLICANT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A9	TRUE COPY OF POSTAL TRACKING REPORT OF THE NOTICE SERVED DATED NIL.

B2B Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. v. Ths Leisure Entertainment Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B2B Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. v. Ths Leisure Entertainment Pvt. Ltd.

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

Reena Chandy Vs Union of India

Prasanna Babu @ Babu Vs Aliarkutty

Sajeena S. Vs Irshad a.

Aleyamma Jacob, Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

P.K. Rameshan Vs Zaleel Babu Z.

The President, S.N.D.P. Yogam Vs State of Kerala