IMPORTANT POINT
The impact of arbitration clauses on legal remedies and the consideration of irreparable loss in granting interim reliefs.

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

I.A. 6942/2024 (for exemption)

2. This is an application seeking exemption from filing originals/certified/cleared/typed or translated copies of documents, left side margins, electronic documents, etc. Original documents shall be produced/filed at the time of Admission/denial, if sought, strictly as per the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act and the DHC (Original Side) Rules, 2018.

3. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

4. Accordingly, the application is disposed of.

O.M.P.(I)(COMM.) 96/2024

5. The present petition has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner- Startupwala Pvt. Ltd. under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter, `1996 Act') seeking interim reliefs. The Petitioner vide this petition inter alia seeks a direction to the Respondent-Google India Pvt. Ltd. to maintain status quo ante by reinstating all the digital ads of the Petitioner which were disapproved/marked as `LIMITED' on 10th December, 2023, 29th December, 2023 and 30th January, 2024. Further, the Petitioner also seeks directions to restrain the Respondent from disapproving any remaining ads of the Petitioner which have been marked as `Limited by Policy'.

6. The case of the Petitioner it is engaged in the business of corporate and management consultancy services. It provides assistance of secretarial and corporate compliances including business setups, IPR, accounting, book- keeping services, etc. The Petitioner is one of the companies which utilizes advertising services provided by Google India Pvt. Ltd. under its advertising program terms.

7. According to the Petitioner, since 2020, it started utilising the digital advertisement services offered by Google India Pvt. Ltd. by accepting the `Google India Pvt. Ltd. Advertising Program Terms' (hereinafter, `Advertising Terms'). The Advertising Terms were made subject to the applicable Google policies available at www.google.co/ads/policies. However, since August, 2023 some of the advertisements which have been released by the Petitioner are being disapproved by the Google advertisement program upon giving reference to a policy called `Government Documents and Official Services'.

8. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner-Mr. Devashish Marwah submits that the advertisements of the Petitioner are the mainstay for earning revenues and the blocking of ads by Google, which is one of the main platforms, is resulting in enormous financial loss to the Petitioner.

9. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner further submits that it has been in continuous correspondence with Google via emails from August, 2023 to February, 2024. The chronology of events as per ld. Counsel for the Petitioner would show that those advertisements which were approved even once are again disapproved, and the responses being received are through an automated platform. Thus, the Petitioner is unable to even interact with any official and seek reasons as to why the advertisements are disapproved.

10. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that Clause 13 of the Advertisement Terms provides for an arbitration clause which states that the disputes between parties would be resolved by arbitration which will be conducted in Santa Clara County, California, USA. He submits that this is a standard arbitration clause in the Advertisement Terms and the said clause precludes the Petitioner from exercising its legal remedies effectively.

11. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner also points out that an email dated 12th February, 2024 by Google informed the Petitioner that the query of the Petitioner with regard to the disapproval of its advertisements was reviewed and the disapproved advertisements have now been approved. However, on 14th February, 2024 the same very advertisements which were approved on 12th February, 2024 were disapproved. According to