IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. HARI SHANKAR, J
RAJ KUMARI TANEJA – Appellant
Versus
RAJINDER KUMAR & ANR. – Respondent
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
21.08.2024
ARB.P. 862/2023
1. This is a petition under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, “the 1996 Act”hereinafter for reference of the disputes between the parties to arbitration.
2. The dispute arises in the context of a Partnership Deed dated 25 February 2017, relating to Respondent 2 partnership firm, of which the petitioner and Respondent 1 are partners.
3. Partnership Deed envisaged resolution of disputes by arbitration, vide Clause 14 of the Partnership Deed, which reads thus:
“14. That in the case of dispute between the partners, the same shall be decided under the provision of Indian Arbitration Act theninforce.”
4. As the disputes arose between the petitioner and the respondents and there is no pre-arbitral protocol envisaged in the afore-extracted arbitration clause, the petitioner, on 6 May 2023, addressed a legal notice to the respondents proposing reference of the disputes between them to arbitration.
5. The respondents replied by a communication dated 29 May 2023, disputing any liability towards the petitioner.
6. As the parties, therefore, have not been able to arrive at a consensus regarding arbitration, despite the existence of an
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.