Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Faridabad Implements Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Mypreferred Transformation and Hospitality Private Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of lease agreements (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. claims and applications before the arbitrator (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 24) |
| 3. discretion of arbitrator regarding security (Para 17 , 18 , 20 , 21) |
| 4. final directions and disposition of appeals (Para 27 , 28 , 29) |
1. M/s Faridabad Implements Pvt. Ltd. (FIPL), MyPreferred Transformation And Hospitality Pvt. Ltd (MPTHPL) and OYO Hotels and Homes Pvt. Ltd. (OHHPL) were the claimant, Respondent 1 and Respondent 2 respectively, before the learned arbitrator in the proceedings from which the present appeals emanate.
2. The dispute emanated out of two lease deeds. The first lease deed dated 11th December, 2018 was executed between FIPL and OHHPL. Under the said lease deed, OHHPL leased out, to FIPL, the premises at C-18, Friends Colony East, New Delhi for a period of nine years, of which five years were to be treated as a lock in period, within which the contract could not be terminated and, if terminated, would entail penal consequences. The monthly rent of the premises was fixed at Rs.17,75,000/- for the first year, to be increased by 4% every succeeding year.
3. A second lease deed, dated 1st O
The court upheld an arbitrator's discretion under Section 17 for interim security but clarified the need to reconsider the amount based on specific claims presented.
Section 17 relief under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act requires proof of both a prima facie case and potential asset dissipation, which was not adequately demonstrated.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the order passed by the Arbitrator under section 17(1)(ii)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was a proper exercise of jurisdict....
The sufficiency of pleadings in a petition under section 9 of the Arbitration Act and the court's power to grant interim measures to secure a claim, considering the financial condition of the party a....
An arbitral tribunal, while adjudicating an application for interim protection under Section 17, does not determine the lis between the parties.
The arbitral tribunal has broad powers to issue interim measures under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, ensuring protection of claims during ongoing proceedings.
Interim relief under Section 9 requires showing real apprehension of irreparable loss; mere speculation does not justify injunctions against debtor actions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of securing the interest of the appellants and the need for proper adjudication of claims and counter-claims before the arbitrator.
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
