Contiasia Hospitality and HR Solutions Pvt. Ltd. vs Commandant TSP VIII Battalion

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Contiasia Hospitality and HR Solutions Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Commandant TSP VIII Battalion - Respondent
Arb.P. 593 of 2021
Decided On : 11-04-2022

Important Points

Parties may consent to arbitration for disputes arising from contractual obligations, with specific provisions for arbitrator fees and necessary disclosures as per applicable law.

Subject

Arbitration - Dispute Resolution

Headnote

(A) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 12 - Disputes arising from non-payment to laborers leading to compensation claims against the principal employer - The parties consent to refer the disputes to Delhi International Arbitration Centre for arbitration of claims and counterclaims. (Para 4)

(B) The arbitrator's fees will be governed by the schedule set forth by the DIAC, and a disclosure is mandated by law prior to proceeding with arbitration. (Paras 5 and 6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner is seeking appointment of an Arbitral Tribunal under an agreement dated 05.01.2018, while the respondent claims to have already incurred excess payments due to labor court awards against them.

Findings of Court:
The disputes are referred to the DIAC for arbitration to address both claims and counterclaims.

Issues: The core issue involved the referral of disputes related to labor payments and the appointment of an arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasizes that the parties' consent to arbitration under the DIAC's rules is crucial, alongside the legal requirements for arbitrator disclosure.

Result: Petition disposed of in the terms stated.

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks arbitration appointment. (Para 1)
2. respondent's counter-claim due to unpaid labor awards. (Para 2 , 3)
3. disputes referred to diac for arbitration. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
4. petition disposed as stated. (Para 7)

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. Petitioner seeks appointment of an Arbitral Tribunal pursuant to agreement dated 05.01.2018.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that petitioner had failed to make payment to the labourers who have initiated proceedings before the Labour Courts and awards are being passed against the respondent being the principal employer.

3. He submits that on account of the passing of the award, the respondent has been made to pay the amount in excess of the amount that would have paid to the petitioner and accordingly respondent also have a counter-claim against the petitioner.

4. In view of the above and with the consent of the parties, the disputes are referred to the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC), which would appoint an arbitrator to arbitrate the claims and counter claims. The arbitration shall take place under the aegis of the DIAC in accordance with its rules and regulations.

5. The arbitrator would be entitled to charge fees in accordance with the schedule of fee stipulated by the DIAC.

6. The arbitrator shall furnish the requisite disclosure under section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 within two week of entering reference.

7. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.