JUDGMENT :

1. By way of present petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

(a) Appoint an independent Arbitrator for Resolution of dispute arising out of License Agreement annexed at Annexure-C to the Petition;

(b) Any other and further relief deemed just and proper be granted in the interest of justice.

2. The background of facts which has given rise to present petition is that petitioner company is incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 as a Private Limited company. The respondent, which is a body corporate, created under the Airport Authority of India, 1994 has floated tenders for food court facility in Domestic Terminal at S.V.P.I. Airport, Ahmedabad and in response thereto, petitioner's bid found to be eligible was accepted by the authority. On 20.3.2018, respondent issued an award of license for food court facility in Terminal-1 at S.V.P.I, Airport and executed a license agreement on 9.4.2018. Initial period of license was fixed as one year from 19.5.2018 to 18.5.2019 and then by virtue of amendments, extended upto 30.6.2020 on the terms and conditions which are fixed.

3. By virtue of said terms of license agreement, petitioner had to pay monthly license fee of Rs.20,07,000/- + GST and other applicable taxes and had to deposit a sum of Rs.47,36,520/-, equal to two months license fee as a security deposit in the form of Demand Draft/ Pay Order/ Bank Guarantee in favour of the respondent payable at Ahmedabad.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the said execution of the license agreement dated 20.3.2018, on 27.3.2018, bank guarantee was issued of Rs.47,36,520/- and expiry date of bank guarantee was made upto 30.6.2020 in view of extension. Due to certain layouts and orientation of outlet, the authority said to have revised the layout vide email dated 19.4.2018 and respondent changed the location and handed over new location to the petitioner on 18.5.2018. According to the petitioner, there was a delay of 60 days in handing over the site by respondent. On account of multiple differences, as stated in the petition, opening of outlet got delayed by a further period of more than 45 days and as such, petitioner made a request for refund of the license fee charged with respect to that period, but said request was rejected by email communication dated 10.9.2020. Then the license agreement tenure by efflux of time got terminated on 30.6.2020.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that after such termination by efflux of time, petitioner forthwith delivered the possession and since there was no means of access the premises, assets and material of the petitioner lying in such premises, an attempt was made to explore the possibility of extension of terms of license agreement and as such, petitioner did not remove its assets of more than rupees one crore lying at the Airport premises at the time of handing over the possession and then extension in the form of email exchanged between the parties and by that time, pandemic effect of Covid-19 prevailed. As a result of this, petitioner was unable to remove its goods and other material. Even respondent on account of limited operational activities at the Airport due to Covid-19 pandemic and in view of various Government guidelines, did not consider it necessary to request the petitioner to remove its assets lying at the Airport.

6. Surprisingly, according to the petitioner, on 18.9.2020, respondent raised invoice for the month of April to June 2020 and due to payments have also been prescribed, same was shared vide email dated 22.9.2020 and then according to petitioner, respondent authority had wrongly raised invoices for the period beyond the license period and on the contrary, petitioner is entitled to seek adjustment of an amount to the extent of Rs.13,54,454.84 and by giving details in the petition, it has been mentioned by petitioner that only an amount of Rs.1,01,895.56 remain