Sital Dass Jewellers vs Asian Hotels (North) Ltd.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Sital Dass Jewellers – Appellant
Versus
Asian Hotels (North) Ltd. – Respondent

Table of Content
1. multiple petitions for arbitrator appointment combined. (Para 1 , 2)
2. factual background of petitioners and agreements. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. arguments regarding possession and arbitration clause. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. interim arrangement and consideration of both parties. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
5. arbitration clause recognition. (Para 17 , 18)
6. final orders and appointment of arbitrator. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)

JUDGMENT (Oral)

Suresh Kumar Kait, J. The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.

1. The above captioned first four petitions have been preferred under Section 11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of Arbitrators for adjudication of disputes between the parties.

2. Since the relief sought by the petitioners in these petitions is more or less similar against a common respondent, therefore, with the consent of counsel for the parties, these petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

3. Petitioner No.1 in the above captioned first petition [ARB. P. 661/2021] is a proprietorship firm at L-81, Shopping arcade, Hotel Hyatt Regency, Bhik