SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 3408

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Chandra Dhari Singh, J.
Omaxe Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Balvinder Kaur Nijjar – Respondent
O.M.P. (COMM) 295 of 2021 & I.A. 12845 of 2021 & I.A. 12846 of 2021 & I.A. 14857 of 2021
Decided On : 19-07-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Ramesh Singh and Mr. Rajshekhar Rao, Senior Advocates with Ms. Mukti Bodh, and Mr. Vipin Sharma, Advocates, for the Petitioner.
Ms. Shobhana Takiar and Mr. Kuljeet Singh, Advocates Mr. Sujoy Gaur, Mr. Rajat Gaur, Mr.R.K.Sharma, and Mr.Himanshu Aggarwal, Advocates, for the Interveners.

Headnote:

[KEYWORD] - [SUBJECT] - [ACT SECTION LIST] - [SUMMARY]

Fact of the Case:

The instant Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter `The Act, 1996') being aggrieved of the Award dated 20th March 2020 seeking the following reliefs: "a. Pass an order summoning the entire original arbitral record from the Learned Sole Arbitrator in the arbitration proceedings arising out of Arbitration Petition No.20/2015 titled Jaswinder Singh & Anor. Vs. Omaxe Ltd.; b. Pass an order thereby setting aside the impugned Award dated 20.03.2020 passed in arbitration proceedings arising out of Arbitration Petition No.20/2015 titled Jaswinder Singh & Anor. Vs. Omaxe Ltd.; c. Pass an order thereby allowing the Counter Claims made by the Petitioner in arbitration proceedings arising out of A Arbitration Petition No.20/2015 titled Jaswinder Singh & Anor. Vs. Omaxe Ltd.; d. Stay the operation and execution of the impugned Award dated 20.03.2020 passed by the Learned Sole Arbitrator during the pendency of the present proceedings. e. Pass any other or further order(s) deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice."

Finding of the Court:

The Court is of the view that the Learned Sole Arbitrator was well within his jurisdiction and capacity to award the claim/compensation in favour of the respondent.

Issues: Whether the impugned Award dated 20th March 2020 is liable to be set aside under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court is of the view that the Learned Sole Arbitrator was well within his jurisdiction and capacity to award the claim/compensation in favour of the respondent. The Award is well-reasoned and is not in contravention of the fundamental policy of Indian law, and thus there is no reason for interference in the impugned Award. In view of the above discussion of facts and law, this Court finds no reason to set aside the impugned Arbitral Award dated 20th March 2020.

Final Decision: The petition is, accordingly, dismissed along with pending applications, if any.

JUDGMENT

Chandra Dhari Singh, J. The instant Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter `The Act, 1996') being aggrieved of the Award dated 20th March 2020 seeking the following reliefs:

    "a. Pass an order summoning the entire original arbitral record from the Learned Sole Arbitrator in the arbitration proceedings arising out of Arbitration Petition No.20/2015 titled Jaswinder Singh & Anor. Vs. Omaxe Ltd.;

    b. Pass an order thereby setting aside the impugned award dated 20.03.2020 passed in arbitration proceedings arising out of Arbitration Petition No.20/2015 titled Jaswinder Singh & Anor. Vs. Omaxe Ltd.;

    c. Pass an order thereby allowing the Counter Claims made by the Petitioner in arbitration proceedings arising out of A Arbitration Petition No.20/2015 titled Jaswinder Singh & Anor. Vs. Omaxe Ltd.;

    d. Stay the operation and execution of the impugned Award dated 20.03.2020 passed by the Learned Sole Arbitrator during the pendency of the present proceedings.

    e. Pass an order allowing costs of the present proceedings in favour of the Petitioner and against the Respondents;

    f. Pass any other or further order(s) deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice."

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. The petitioner was a Real-Estate Development Company incorporated under The Companies Act, 1956 and subsequently under the Companies Act, 2013. It works in the construction and development of commercial, residential and integrated Real-Estate projects across India.

3. The petitioner undertook the construction and development of a commercial project in the nature of a shopping/commercial mall in the name and style of "Omaxe Novelty Mall" situated at Lawrence Road, Amritsar, Punjab (hereinafter referred to as "Project/said Project") in collaboration with the landowners, namely M/s. Novelty Associates Pvt. Ltd., vide Collaboration Agreement.

4. On 7th April 2005, an MOU was executed at New Delhi between the petitioner and the respondent (owner & Attorney Holder of other Co-owners) for the purpose of development and construction of commercial complex on the land owned by them under the name and style of Omaxe Novelty Mall, Amritsar. As per the terms of the said MOU, built-up area was to be shared by petitioner and respondent in the ratio of 55% and 45%, respectively. The sale proceeds were to be received in a separate escrow account in the name of "Omaxe-Novelty" with standing instructions to the Bank to transfer 90% of the proceeds to the individual account of the parties as per their sharing ratio of the project. The balance amount of 10% was agreed to be transferred to the account of Omaxe for meeting costs and expenses of advertisement, marketing, brokerage, documentation and office expenses.

5. On 23rd May 2005, a Collaboration Agreement was executed between the petitioner and the respondent for the development of the Commercial Complex/Mall.

6. The landowners had also executed the Power of Attorney dated 23rd May, 2005 in favor of the Petitioner for carrying out the objectives contained in the Collaboration Agreement.

7. The Municipal Corporation, Amritsar vide its letter dated 25th May, 2006, sanctioned the building plan of the project/mall in question with height upto 30 meters pursuant to which the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, the petitioner started the construction of the Mall and it was in full swing by April, 2007.

8. The respondents had approached the petitioner seeking purchase of commercial real-estate in furtherance to the respondents' intentions; the petitioner offered them an opportunity to purchase a commercial property in the nature of a shop in their upcoming said project.

9. Accordingly, the respondents submitted an application dated 10th February, 2007 with the petitioner for provisional allotment of a Unit in the said project. Subsequently following mutual agreement and deliberations between the respondents and the petitioner, vide allotment letter dated

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top