Neutral Citation Number 2023/DHC/000598

FAO (COMM) 20/2023

Page 1 of 8

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Date of Decision: 20^th January, 2023

+

FAO (COMM) 20/2023 & CM APPL. 2925-2928/2023

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI

..... Appellant

Through:

Mr. Sanjeev Sagar, Standing Counsel for

MCD with Ms. Nazia Parveen, Adv.

Versus

MR NARINDER KUMAR

..... Respondent

Through:

None

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

J U D G M E N T

SAURABH BANERJEE, J.: (ORAL)

1.

Appellant (Municipal Corporation of Delhi), the original respondent¹

before the learned Sole Arbitrator, through this appeal under Section 37 of The

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996² seeks to challenge the impugned

judgment dated 31.08.2022 whereby in a petition under Section 34 of the Act

filed by it, the learned District Judge (Commercial Court)-02, Patiala House

Court, New Delhi³ has upheld the Arbitral Award dated 27.11.2020 passed by

the learned Sole Arbitrator in favour of the respondent, the original claimant⁴

before the learned Sole Arbitrator.

1Hereinafter referred to as “MCD”

2 Hereinafter referred as “Act"

3Hereinafter referred to as “learned Trial Court”

4 Hereinafter referred as “allottee”

Digitally Signed

By:BABLOO SHAH

Signing Date:27.01.2023

19:26:49

Signature Not Verified

Neutral Citation Number 2023/DHC/000598

FAO (COMM) 20/2023

Page 2 of 8

2.

This Court, after hearing detailed arguments addressed by the learned

Standing Counsel for MCD at length, prior to issuing notice and without

entering into the merits of the disputes involved in the present petition, is of the

opinion that in view of the settled position of law regarding the interpretation

and limited scope of interference by the appellate Court under Section 37 of the

Act, especially in view that the MCD is, once again, seeking to reagitate the

very same contentions which have already been refuted after due consideration

by two forums being the learned Sole Arbitrator and the learned Trial Court

below, by two detailed/speaking orders separately, the petition in the present

form is not maintainable under Section 37 of the Act.

3.

It is thus that this Court, hereinbelow, is elucidating only the broad and

essential facts involved in the present dispute, without going into any specific

details with respect to time or date or event, more so, as the same are irrelevant

for the purposes of the adjudication of the present appeal in terms of what

follows hereunder.

4.

Record of the present appeal reveals that pursuant to invitation of sealed

tenders for allotment of parking site, the allottee was allotted car/scooter parking

site at Jwala Heri Market, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi⁵ for a period of five years.

As such, though the possession of the said parking site was claimed to be

handed over to him on a particular date, however, physical possession thereof

was actually handed over to him subsequently. As the allottee faced non-

cooperation in operating the said parking site from various entities and as he was

handed over only a part thereof instead of what was allotted to him, the allottee

faced difficulties. Moreover, despite the allottee repeatedly taking up his cause

5 Hereinafter referred as “parking site”

Digitally Signed

By:BABLOO SHAH

Signing Date:27.01.2023

19:26:49

Signature Not Verified

Neutral Citation Number 2023/DHC/000598

FAO (COMM) 20/2023

Page 3 of 8

with the MCD and the local Police, from time to time, MCD served Demand

Notice(s) and issued Show Cause Notice(s) upon him for payment of

outstanding dues for different periods.

5.

Because a sizable chunk of the parking site originally allotted to the

allottee could not be made operational as some portions thereof were deleted by

the Traffic Police and as no amount was owing on his behalf, he initiated arbitral

proceedings against MCD before the learned