Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
Ramacivil India Construction Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
NBCC (India) Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. suit arises from amrapali dispute. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. defendant argues for plaint rejection based on immunity. (Para 3) |
| 3. plaintiff counters with claims of jurisdiction. (Para 4) |
| 4. court analyzes jurisdiction and contract issues. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 5. court dismisses application based on findings. (Para 30 , 34 , 36) |
JUDGMENT :
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J.
I.A. 10530/2022 (O-VII R-11 of CPC) in CS (COMM) 337/2022
1. The present application(s) have been filed by the applicant/National Buildings Construction Corporation Limited (NBCC) [‘defendant’] under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [‘CPC’] seeking rejection of the plaint in view of the order dated 10.06.2020 passed by the Supreme Court in W.P. (C) No. 940/2017 titled as “Bikram Chatterji v. Union of India & Ors.” The defendant contends that order dated 10.06.2020 in effect interdicts any legal proceedings, on behalf of any parties before any Court, forum or authority qua Amrapali project, which is being completed by the defendant under the supervision of the Supreme Court.
2. The present suit arises out of the dispute whi
Defendant's immunity from legal action applies only to pre-existing disputes under the Amrapali Group contracts; new contracts after Supreme Court orders are subject to jurisdiction of civil courts.
The rejection of a plaint based on misjoinder of parties and causes of action is erroneous, and disputed questions cannot be decided at the time of considering an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of....
The court held that the District Judge lacked jurisdiction to address arbitration matters, affirming the exclusive domain of Commercial Courts under the relevant legal frameworks.
The court ruled that allegations regarding builder buyer agreements being null and void do not constitute a commercial dispute under the Commercial Courts Act as per Section 2(1)(c)(vii).
A plaint cannot be rejected if it discloses a cause of action, and non-parties to a compromise decree have the right to challenge its validity.
A party cannot disregard an interim injunction based on claims of jurisdiction; violation may lead to contempt punishment, maintaining the authority of court orders.
A court cannot be denied jurisdiction by an agreement between parties if that court is competent to adjudicate the matter based on where the breach occurred and the nature of the contract.
The court ruled that the subsequent agreement supersedes the initial agreement, establishing jurisdiction at Bhavnagar, and the applicants failed to meet the criteria for an interim injunction.
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator in international commercial arbitration, as such powers lie exclusively with the Supreme Court, making any award from improperly appointed t....
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
