Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Khera Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. - Appellants
Versus
B. K . Bansal - Respondent
ARB.A. No. 1 of 2023, I.A. 10996 of 2023
Decided On : 16-01-2024
Arbitration and Conciliation Act - B.K. Bansal vs. Khera Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. - Section 17, Section 37 - The A&C Act
Fact of the Case:
The matter involved a claim petition with multiple claims raised by the claimant/respondent. An application under Section 17 of the A&C Act was filed by the respondent, seeking various reliefs including restoration of physical possession of the subject property. The learned Arbitrator allowed the application, leading to the appellant's challenge of the order on various grounds.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the learned Arbitrator had passed a reasoned order after considering the submissions of both parties and properly secured the interests of both parties. The court emphasized the limited jurisdiction under Section 37 of the A&C Act and dismissed the appeal, upholding the order of the learned Arbitrator.
Issues: The issues included the validity of the order passed under Section 17 of the A&C Act, the claims raised by the parties, and the possession of the subject property.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the limited jurisdiction under Section 37 of the A&C Act and the need to minimize the supervisory role of the court in arbitral proceedings. It highlighted the importance of maintaining a circumspect approach and ensuring appropriate deference to the arbitration process.
Final Decision: The appeal, along with the pending application, was dismissed, upholding the order of the learned Arbitrator.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral) - The present appeal has been filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (herein referred to as "the A&C Act") against the order dated 23.02.2023 passed by the learned Arbitral Tribunal comprising of Sole Arbitrator in case Ref. No. DAC/3210/09-21 titled as "B.K. Bansal vs. Khera Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.".
2. Briefly stated the facts are that the matter was referred to the learned Arbitrator in arbitration petition bearing No. 773/2021 titled as B.K. Bansal vs. Khera Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vide order dated 09.09.2021.
3. During the proceedings the claim petition was filed by the claimant/respondent on which primarily the following claims were raised:
"Claim No.1
Mandatory Injunction Directing Respondents To Remove Himself The His Representatives / Staff / Agents From The Property Admeasuring 360 Sq. Yards Bearing No. D-145, Situated In The Railway Board Employs Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., Anand Vihar, Delhi-110092.
Claim No.2
Recovery Of Rs. 9,00,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs Only) Outstanding Towards The Malba, Fixtures And Woods Of Existing Structure alongwith Interest @ 18% Compounded Annually In Terms of Collobaration Agreement Dated 18.07.2012.
Claim No.3
Recovery Of Rs. 64,73,380/- (Rupees Sixty Four Lakh Seventy Three Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Only) Against The Financial Assistance Provided By The Claimant In Terms Of Supplementary Agreement Dated 26.11.2016 Along With Interest @ 18% Compounded Annually.
Claim No.4
Recovery Of Rs. 86,52,948/- (Rupees Eighty Six Lakh Fifty Two Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Eight Only) In Lieu Of The Amount Spent By The Claimant and His Sons On His Behalf On The Pending Construction Of The Property admeasuring 360 Sq.Yards Bearing No. D-145, Situated In The Railway Board Employs Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., Anand Vihar, Delhi-110092 Out Of Their Own Funds And Resources Alongwith Interest @12% Compounded Annually.
Claim No.5
Recovery For An Amount Of Rs. 2,55,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crore Fifty Five Lakh Only) Against The Damages In Terms Of Collaboration Agreement Alongwith Interest @18% Compounded Annually.
Claim No.6
Recovery For A Sum Of Rs. 84,00,000 (Rupees Eighty Four Lakh Only) On Account Of The Rent To The Paid By The Respondents To The Claimant Along With Interest @12% Compounded Annually.
Claim No.7
Recovery For A Sum of Rs. 1,20,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Twenty Lakh Only) For Future Expenses To Be Incurred On Completion Of The Pending Civil And Finishing Work At The Subject Premsies.
Claim No.8
Recovery For A Sum of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Only) Towards Mental Harassment Suffering, Pain And Agony.
Claim No.9
Recovery For Damages On Account Of Depreciation of The Building Being Constructed On Admeasuring 360 Sq.Yards Bearing No. D-145, Situated In The Railway Board Employs Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., Anand Vihar, Delhi-Ll0092.
Claim No.10
Claim For Pendent-Lite Interest From 30.08.2021 To The Date Of Making Of The Award And Future Interest From The Date Of The Award Till The Date Its Realization.
Claim No.11
Costs."
4. While the proceedings were pending, an application under Section 17 of the A&C Act was moved by the respondent herein with the following prayer:
"i. Ad-interim order be passed in favour of the Claimant and against the Respondents for restoring back the physical possession of the subject property in favor of the Claimant from the Respondents and their employees, successors, administrators, representatives; and executors, agents,
ii. Ad-interim order be passed in favour of the Claimant and against the Respondents putting the Claimant back into the physical possession of the subject property; and
iii. Ad-interim injunction restraining the Respondent, their employees, successors, executors, agents, administrators, representatives from frivolously representing to the third party its authorization on behalf of the present Claimant to deal with the said property in any manner, whatsoever; and
iv. Pass such o
The court ruled that interim relief under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act cannot effectively adjudicate final rights or impose substantial financial burdens without trial, emphasizing the importanc....
The jurisdiction of the Appellate Court dealing with an appeal under Section 37 against the judgment in a petition under Section 34 is more constrained than the jurisdiction of the Court dealing with....
The court established that while Section 9 allows for court intervention in arbitration matters, it can only do so if the remedy under Section 17 is found to be ineffective, particularly when third p....
The court may exercise jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act if the remedy under Section 17 is found to be inefficacious, particularly regarding third parties not party....
Principle of minimum judicial intervention is one of fundamental tenets of arbitration law.
The discretionary power under section 17 of the A&C Act should be exercised sparingly and not to convert indeterminate and unsecured counter-claims into secure claims.
The arbitral tribunal has broad powers to issue interim measures under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, ensuring protection of claims during ongoing proceedings.
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
