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



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, J.
Asian Hotels (North) Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Swatika Jain - Respondent
Arb.P. 733 of 2021 and Arb.P. 735 of 2021
Decided On : 27-08-2021




The court appointed an arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from license agreements, emphasizing prior rulings and compliance with statutory requirements.

Headnote:(A) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 11(6) - Appointment of Arbitrator - The petitions seek the appointment of an arbitrator for resolving disputes arising from license agreements concerning commercial properties - The parties consented to joint disposal of petitions - Previous similar disputes lead to a consistent appointment of an arbitrator by the court. (Paras 1-8)

(B) Arbitrator's Fee - It is directed that the fee of the appointed arbitrator shall be governed by the Fourth Schedule of the Act. (Para 9)

(C) Compliance - The appointed arbitrator must ensure compliance with Section 12 of the Act before commencing arbitration. (Para 10)

Findings of Court:
The court appointed Mr. R. L. Meena as the sole Arbitrator after confirming consent from both parties.

Issues: The primary issues addressed include whether the disputes can be effectively resolved through arbitration and the appropriate appointment of an arbitrator.

Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld that the arbitration can proceed in accordance with the license agreement clauses and previous rulings regarding similar disputes.

Result: Petitions disposed of with directions.

Table of Content
1. procedure for appointment of arbitrator (Para 1 , 2)
2. details of license agreements and dispute (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. submission for arbitration (Para 6 , 7)
4. appointment and duties of arbitrator (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
5. conclusion of petitions (Para 11 , 12)

JUDGMENT

Suresh Kumar Kait, J. (Oral)--The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.

1. The above captioned petitions have been preferred under Section 11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of Arbitrator 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 in the above captioned petitions is a hotel located in a building complex in the name and style of Hyatt Regency located at Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi. Respondent in the first captioned petition [ARB.P.733/2021] is in occupation and use of shop No. U-65-A, located at the Shopping Arcade, Hotel Grand Hyatt located at Bhikaji Cama Place vide License Agreement dated 01.07.1994 and respondent in the second captioned petition [ARB.P.735/2021] ] is in occupation of shop No. M-40, located at the Shopping Arcade, Hotel Grand Hyatt located at Bhikaji Cama Place vide License Agreement dated 10.09.1986.

4. Petitioner by communication dated 29.05.2020 revoked the license agreement and called upon the respondents to remove their goods by 01.06.2020. According to petitioner, the respondents are still in occupation of the shops in question.

5. According to petitioner, the aforesaid communication dated 29.05.2020 was disputed by respondents vide legal notice dated 30.06.2020 and 06.06.2020 respectively.

6. At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute inter se parties can be resolved in terms of Clause-12 of the License Agreement by referring it to an Arbitrator and further informs that in other petitions arising out of similar disputes with regard to occupation of shops in the Shopping Arcade, Hotel Grand Hyatt located at Bhikaji Cama Place and revocation of license agreement, this Court in ARB.P.661/2021 and seven other petitions has appointed Mr. R. L. Meena, former Secretary, department of Law and Justice, the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

7. The aforesaid position is not disputed by learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents.

8. Accordingly, Mr. R. L. Meena, former Secretary, department of Law and Justice (Mobile: 9868601397) is appointed sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties in these petitions.

9. The fee of the learned Arbitrator shall be governed by the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

10. The learned Arbitrator shall ensure compliance of Section 12 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before commencing the arbitration.

11. A copy of this order be sent to the learned Arbitrator for information.

12. With aforesaid directions, these petitions and pending application, if any, are accordingly disposed of.

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