Back
NEELA GOKHALE
Devike Constructions and Developers Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Dilip Vengsarkar Foundation – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NEELA GOKHALE, J.
1. The petition seeks appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate disputes arising out of a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) dated 16th June 2011.
2. The Petitioner is a company engaged in a business of construction and land development and the Respondent is a public trust registered under the provisions of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. It is the case of the Petitioner that the Pimpri-Chinchwad Municipal Corporation (“PCMC”), by an agreement dated 2nd November 2007 vested certain rights in land bearing Survey No. 09(Part) admeasuring approximately 2.56 Hectares at village Theargaon, Pune for a period of 30 years in the Trust. The Trust was permitted to construct a playground and run a Cricket Academy/Gymkhana providing International Standard Training and Coaching facilities to young cricket aspirants from Pimpri-Chinchwad and other adjoining areas free of cost.
3. A MOU dated 16th June 2011 was executed by and between the Respondent Trust and one Shri Dhanraj Keshrimal Sonigara referred to as ‘Promoter’ in the MOU. In terms of MoU a special purpose entity namely ‘DV Gymkhana and Clubhouse
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle of privity of contract, emphasizing that a third party cannot enforce the terms of a contract to which it is not a party.
A binding arbitration agreement exists despite challenges to the validity of accompanying contracts, with disputes to be resolved by an appointed arbitrator.
Dissenting non-signatory member of cooperative society not bound by arbitration clause in development agreement with developer; lacks consent as veritable party despite beneficiary status or executin....
The court found that an arbitration agreement exists between the parties, permitting disputes from multiple MoUs to be addressed in arbitration, emphasizing the limited judicial review role in such m....
The arbitration agreement binds all parties, including non-signatories, and disputes must be referred to arbitration despite objections on limitation and jurisdiction.
The court ruled that allegations of fraud do not negate the enforceability of an arbitration agreement, which operates independently from the underlying contract.
An arbitration agreement must clearly express the parties' intention to submit disputes to arbitration, and an arbitrator cannot adjudicate disputes involving his own decisions to avoid bias.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
