JUDGMENT

[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]

SANJEEV NARULA, J. (Oral):

1. The present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [hereinafter, “the Act’], impugns the Arbitral Award dated 2nd March, 2020 passed by the Sole Arbitrator.

BRIEF FACTS

2. Shri. Subhash Chand Roy, the deceased father of the Respondents [hereinafter, “Testator”], was the absolute owner of lease-hold rights of property bearing ‘No. D-603, Chittaranjan Park, New Delhi-110017 (ad measuring 160 sq. yards)’ [hereinafter, “suit property”]. He executed a Will dated 15th March, 1988 [hereinafter, the “Will”], bequeathing the suit property in favour of his wife. He passed away on 30th January, 1991 and was survived by his wife viz. Smt. Kalyani Roy (since deceased) and children viz. Respondents No. 1 to 3.

3. On the basis of the afore-noted Will and confirmatory affidavits filed by the Respondents (dated 22nd October, 1994) accepting the Will, the suit property stood mutated in the name of Smt. Kalyani Roy in the records of the Land & Development Office [hereinafter, “L & DO”] vide Mutation Letter No. L&DO/PSII/280 dated 6th April, 1995. Subsequently, a ‘Conveyance Deed’ dated 7th December, 2001, was executed by the L & DO in favour of Smt. Kalyani Roy.

4. As owner of the suit property, Smt. Kalyani Roy executed a ‘Collaboration Agreement’ dated 9th August, 2016 with the Petitioner, and in terms thereof, he was to demolish the existing structure on the suit property, develop and reconstruct the same after getting the building plan sanctioned from the concerned authority. The Collaboration Agreement specified Petitioner’s allocation in the proposed redeveloped property as well as the schedule of payments. Subsequently, on 25th September, 2016, a ‘Supplementary Agreement’ was executed between Smt. Kalyani Roy and Petitioner, wherein it was agreed that since possession of the Ground Floor of the suit property was not handed over to the Petitioner, a further payment of Rs. 80,00,000 would be made to Smt. Kalyani Roy only on handing over of the complete possession of the property. Thereafter, on 27th October, 2016, an Agreement (Deed of Extension) was executed between Smt. Kalyani Roy and the Petitioner, whereby time period for handing over the vacant and physical possession of the suit property was extended till 30th April, 2017.

5. On 28th September, 2016, Respondent No. 1 viz. Shri. Sanjay Roy filed a suit for injunction before the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Saket District Courts, New Delhi, wherein the Smt. Kalyani Roy, Respondents No. 2 and 3 and the Petitioner were restrained from dispossessing Respondent No. 1 from the ground floor of the suit property. Pursuant thereto, Smt. Kalyani Roy requested Petitioner for extension of time for handing over the possession of the suit property. Thereafter, Smt. Kalyani Roy demised on 19th January, 2017, leaving behind a will dated 30th March, 2016 – bequeathing her property to her four children i.e., Respondents herein, in equal shares.

6. According to the Petitioner, Respondents being the legal heirs of the owner, were legally bound to perform the obligations of their mother – late Smt. Kalyani Roy, in terms of the Collaboration Agreement. Since they failed to hand over the vacant and physical possession of the suit property, they breached their obligations under the afore-noted Agreements. Thus, owing to the disputes between the parties, consequent to a petition filed by the Petitioner under Section 11 of the Act, the Arbitral Tribunal was constituted by this Court on 6th September, 2018.1 AT ARBITRATION

7. In arbitration, Petitioner made the following claims:

“(i) Respondent No.1 not to obstruct the access of the Claimant to the first, second and terrace floors of the property No. D-603, Chittranjan Park, New Delhi- 110019.

(ii) The Respondent No.1 to hand over the possession of the Ground Floor of the property No. D-603, Chittranjan Park, New Delhi-110 019 to give effect to the Collaboration Agreement dat