Realtech Construction Private Limited and Anr. v. Fame India Limited

Punjab & Haryana HC17 May 2012ARB/170/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court applied Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act to appoint a retired Justice as arbitrator after parties failed to agree on a name, addressing disputes over a multiplex construction MOU and rent losses.

What did the court decide?

Justice M.R. Agnihotri (Retd.) was appointed as arbitrator to resolve the dispute; fee to be as per High Court Rules.

Realtech Construction Private Limited and Anr. Vs Fame… — Arbitration | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Arbitration Case No.170 of 2011 (O&M)

¶3

Date of decision : 17.5.2012

¶4

Realtech Construction Private Limited and another

....Petitioners

Versus

Frame India Limited

...Respondent

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER

¶10

Present: Mr. Puneet Bali, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Saurya Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶11

Ms.Deepali Puri, Advocate for the respondent.

¶12

MAHESH GROVER, J.

¶13

This is an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with the “Scheme of Appointment of Arbitrators by the Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court, 2003” regarding the existence of an arbitration clause governing the agreement between the parties and an agreement to refer the matter to the arbitrator.

¶14

The facts of the case as set out in the application are that the petitioners are the owners of a plot whereupon a multiplex was to be constructed and made operational. According to the terms of the agreement between the parties, the multiplex

¶15

Arbitration Case No.170 of 2011 (O&M) -2-

¶16

was to be completed within six months of the date when respondent was provided access to the multiplex. According to the petitioners, the respondent failed to adhere to the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding which caused loss to the petitioners as they had to incur monetary loss on following

¶17

counts :-

¶18

“I. Rs.20 lakhs per month on account of non-receipt of rent from the respondent being Rs.50/- per square feet for 40,000 (approx.) sq. ft. super area.

¶19

II. Rs.20 lakhs to Rs.30 lakhs per month on account of non-receipt of revenue from parking, maintenance, advertisement etc.

¶20

III. Rs.2.32 Crores per month (being rent of Rs.125 for 1,85,000 sq. ft. super area) on account of nonreceipt of rent from the other lessees.

¶21

It is submitted pursuant to the illegal acts on the part of the respondent, that the petitioners would be suffering a loss of Rs.16,32,00,000/- for six months.” The respondent, however, disputed this liability.

¶22

The Memorandum of Understanding contained an arbitration clause to which there is no denial but the names suggested by the petitioners were found to be unacceptable to the respondent which resulted in filing of the present application.

¶23

Arbitration Case No.170 of 2011 (O&M) -3-

¶24

When the matter was taken up by this Court, it gave an option to the parties to agree upon the name of an arbitrator if they could adopt a consensual approach. However, those efforts having failed learned counsel for the parties have submitted that an arbitrator be appointed by this Court and have expressed their anxiety that the same be done expeditiously in view of the fact that both the parties are suffering losses on account of nonresolution of their dispute.

¶25

Accordingly, considering the facts in their entirety, I appoint Justice M.R.Agnihotri (Retd.) as arbitrator to resolve the dispute inter se between the parties. The arbitrator shall be entitled to fee as per Punjab and Haryana High Court (Arbitrator's Panel and Fee) Rules, 2011.

¶26

Disposed of.

¶27

17.5.2012 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE

¶28

dss

Realtech Construction Private Limited and Anr. v. Fame India Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Realtech Construction Private Limited and Anr. v. Fame India Limited

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

Amarjeet Singh Vs Surina Rajan & Ors.

Jaskirat Kaur and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Bhupinder Singh Vs Chandigarh Administration & or.S

M/S Induction Furnace Association of North India Vs Punjab State Power Corp. Ltd. (Pspcl)&Ors

Jagjeet Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Rohit Baluja Vs State of Haryana & Ors.