The petitioner's failure to establish a prima facie case and balance of convenience disentitled it from claiming relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

1. By this order, I shall dispose of the application/petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed with the prayer to restrain the respondent from invoking Bank Guarantee dated 24.12.2012 amounting Rs.4.10 crores, insurance cover amounting to Rs.14,28,72,000/- and directing the respondent to revoke the notice of default dated 16.02.2015.

2. In the petition, it is averred that the petitioner is a private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act and is in the business of organising tour and travels. Mrs. Sonila Mehra, Authorized Representative of the petitioner has been duly authorized to present the present petition vide Board Resolution dated 17.02.2015. The respondent is a trade association for the world’s airlines representing 250 airlines and 84% of total air traffic and is engaged in the operation of accreditation of Travel Agencies around the world. The respondent issued a Travel Agent’s Handbook (Resolution 818g Edition) which governs the relation between the petitioner and respondent. On 14.05.2007, parties entered into an agreement whereby the petitioner was appointed as an agent for selling the passenger air tickets. As per Clause 14 of the Agreement, any matter reviewed by arbitration pursuant to Service Agency Rules shall be submitted to arbitration.

3. It is further averred in the petition that the petitioner company was allotted IATA code bearing No.14-3-6687-0. Sub-agent of the petitioner, namely, M/s Easy Trip Travels Pvt. Ltd. had been purchasing tickets through the petitioner since November, 2012. A bank guarantee bearing No.543/LG/12913 was issued by the petitioner in lieu of prospective default. During the period 23.01.2015 to 31.01.2015, the sub-agent had purchased tickets worth Rs.11.22 crores, whereas the petitioner purchased tickets worth Rs.60 lakhs. The respondent had raised a demand of Rs.11,80,40,844/- which was payable on 11.02.2015. The petitioner had issued a cheque bearing No.401892 dated 09.02.2015 amounting to Rs.11,80,40,844/-, however the sub-agent did not remit its part of dues amounting to Rs.11.22 crores and had raised a frivolous dispute vide suit bearing CS(OS) No.406/2015. When the petitioner did not receive payment from the sub-agents, the petitioner immediately intimated to the Airlines and IATA for cancellation of those tickets for which money was not received from sub-agents. The petitioner cancelled/refunded tickets for Rs.1.50 crores. However, the Airlines stopped canceling the tickets despite e-mails dated 13.02.2015 and 14.02.2015, which resulted in non-payment to IATA by the petitioner. There was no default on the part of the petitioner as it had taken every step to get the tickets cancelled, but the Airlines did not cancel the tickets. On 11.02.2015, the website link of the petitioner had been closed/shut down by the respondent.

4. On 12.02.2015, a notice was issued to the petitioner for non-payment of dues which was replied vide e-mail dated 12.02.2015 and request was made to cancel the unused tickets. On 14.02.2015, the petitioner had requested ISS, Operations and Service Centre not to declare the petitioner in default. Thereafter, the respondent issued the default notice dated 16.02.2015 and also a notification of potential claim to IFCO Tokio General Insurance. This Court in CS(OS) No.406/2015 vide order dated 15.02.2015 restrained the petitioner from canceling any tickets. On 17.02.2015, the petitioner issued a legal notice to the Travel Agency Commissioner, Area 3 to restrain the respondent from invoking the bank guarantee and insurance cover.

5. In reply filed on behalf of the respondent, it is mentioned that the petitioner is governed by resolution 820e and made the claim and could make the claim accordingly. As per Article 3.4 of Resolution 820e, the petitioner obligated to approach the Travel Agency Commissioner and Federation of International Association of Agents for resolution of dispute before approaching this Cour