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
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Travel Retail Services Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Three Vee Marketing Pvt. Ltd. - Respondent
Arb.P. 356 of 2022
Decided On : 19-04-2022




Parties can mutually consent to refer disputes to arbitration despite disagreements on pre-arbitration steps taken.

Headnote:(A) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Reference to arbitration - Disputes referred for arbitration following a Sub-Licence Agreement dated 04.12.2018. The parties consented to appoint an arbitrator to resolve disputes, including counterclaims, after the petitioner claimed pre-arbitration steps were taken. (Paras 1-5)

(B) Pre-arbitration requirements - The dispute arose over the adequacy of pre-arbitration steps taken by the petitioner; however, both parties agreed to proceed with arbitration. (Paras 2-4)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to refer disputes to arbitration, citing efforts at reconciliation, opposed by the respondent claiming counterclaims were pending computation.

Findings of Court:
The court appointed an arbitrator and disposed of the petition in terms agreeing to arbitration.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner had completed requisite pre-arbitration steps.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized consent between the parties to refer the matter for arbitration notwithstanding disputes on prior steps.

Result: Petition disposed of.

Table of Content
1. reference to arbitration sought. (Para 1)
2. disputes regarding pre-arbitration steps and counterclaims. (Para 2 , 3)
3. consent for arbitration expressed. (Para 4)
4. appointment of arbitrator and disclosure requirements. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
5. petition disposed as ordered. (Para 8)

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. Petitioner seeks reference of disputes to Arbitration in accordance with the Sub-Licence Agreement dated 04.12.2018.

2. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that petitioner has not taken the requisite pre-arbitration steps. This is disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner who submits that efforts were made to reconcile, some proposals were also exchanged, however, respondent did not honour their offer and consequently the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that respondent also has certain counter claims which are in the process of being computed.

4. Without prejudice to the above, learned counsel for the parties pray that the disputes be referred to arbitration.

5. With the consent of the parties and without prejudice to their rights and contentions, Mr. Dalip Mehra, Advocate (Mobile No. +91 9811084919; Email: dalipmehra@yahoo.com) is appointed as the sole Arbitrator. The Arbitral tribunal shall adjudicate the claims and counter claims, if any, between the parties.

6. The fees of the learned Arbitrator shall be as per the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

7. Arbitrator shall furnish the requisite disclosure under section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 within two weeks of entering reference.

8. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

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