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
| 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.
The court appointed an arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from license agreements, emphasizing prior rulings and compliance with statutory requirements.
Arbitration - Appointment of Arbitrator - Former Secretary, department of Law and Justice is appointed sole Arbitrator to adjudicate dispute between parties in these petitions.
The court established that both parties must mutually agree on the appointment of an arbitrator to ensure unbiased adjudication and upheld the arbitration agreement between the parties.
The court emphasized the unbiased adjudication of disputes between the parties and rejected the contention of the petitioners to appoint an arbitrator of their choice, in line with the legal principl....
Arbitration - Appointment of Arbitrator - Arbitration agreement between the parties and invocation of arbitration are not disputed by respondents - Till Arbitrator enters into reference, respondent s....
The acceptance of the termination of the License Agreement and the agreement to hand over possession rendered the petition moot, leading to its disposal.
The court affirmed the appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for disputes arising from an uncontested License Agreement.
The court can appoint an Arbitrator when parties fail to mutually agree, as per agreement provisions and arbitration law.
The main legal point established is the court's authority to appoint a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the arbitration and Conciliation act, 1996 when the parties fail to mutually appoint one,....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.