Saya Buildcon Private Limited vs Vijay Kumar Aggarwal

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.
Saya Buildcon Private Limited - Appellant
Versus
Vijay Kumar Aggarwal - Respondent
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 105 of 2022 & I.A. 5197 of 2022
Decided On : 09-05-2022

Important Points

Parties consented to arbitration under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, emphasizing the validity of arbitration clauses in partnership agreements and the right to seek interim measures.

Subject

Civil Law - Arbitration

Headnote

(A) Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 9 and 17 - Petitioner seeks declaratory and interim measures related to disputes arising from a partnership agreement and memorandum of understanding - Parties consent to arbitration and appointment of a sole arbitrator for resolution - Parties may approach the arbitrator for interim measures as per law. (Paras 1-6)

(B) Consent to Arbitration - The Court constitutionally appoints a sole arbitrator to adjudicate claims, affirming parties' rights to seek interim measures.

Facts of the case:
The disputes arose from a partnership agreement and a memorandum of understanding dated 22.11.2017, both containing arbitration clauses.

Findings of Court:
The Court referred the parties to arbitration and appointed a sole arbitrator, outlining the process for interim measures.

Issues: The primary issue involved the enforceability of the arbitration clauses in the partnership agreement and memorandum of understanding.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that the parties could resolve their disputes through arbitration as agreed, emphasizing the autonomy of parties to approach the tribunal for interim relief.

Result: Petition disposed of in terms of arbitration agreement.

Table of Content
1. existence of disputes leading to arbitration. (Para 1 , 2)
2. consent to appoint an arbitral tribunal. (Para 3)
3. appointment and jurisdiction of the arbitrator. (Para 4 , 5)
4. access to interim measures in arbitration. (Para 6)
5. conclusion and disposal of the petition. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. Petitioner, by this petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 seeks certain declaratory and interim measures against the respondents.

2. The disputes have arisen, inter-alia, out of the partnership agreement and the memorandum of understanding both dated 22.11.2017. Both the partnership agreement and memorandum of understanding contain clauses providing for settlement of disputes through the process of arbitration.

3. After some arguments, learned counsel for the parties are agreeable that an Arbitral Tribunal be constituted by this Court in these proceedings itself, reserving the right of the parties to approach the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 17 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 for interim measures.

4. Accordingly, with the consent of the parties and without prejudice to their respective rights and contentions, parties are referred to arbitration.

5. With the consent of parties, Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri, Former Judge, Supreme Court of India, (Email: aksikrij@gmail.com; pstojusticesikri@gmail.com) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the claims and counter-claims, if any, of the parties.

6. It would be open to the parties to approach the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 17 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 for interim measures, in accordance with law.

7. The fees of the Arbitral Tribunal shall be as per the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

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

9. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.