SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 14067

HIGH COURT OF DELHI
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J
RAJ BHARTI DWIVEDI – Appellant
Versus
M/S OMAXE LIMITED THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR – Respondent


Advocates:
SUBHRO PROKAS MUKHERJEE

ORDER

% 05.04.2024 I.A. 18936/2023 (exemption)

1. Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions 2. Application stands disposed of. ARB.P. 1009/2023

3. By way of the present petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter, referred to as the ‘A&C Act’), the petitioner seeks appointment of an Arbitral Tribunal comprising of a sole arbitrator, to adjudicate the disputes inter se the parties.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s predecessor-in-interest was allotted a commercial property vide the allotment letter dated 17.02.2011 by the respondent. It has further been submitted that vide an addendum dated 17.02.2011, it was agreed that the respondent would pay the petitioner’s predecessor-in-interest commitment charge of Rs.61,783 (minus TDS) every month during the commitment period and a lease deed dated 17.02.2011 containing an arbitration clause was duly executed between the parties.

5. Learned counsel has further submitted that it was further been agreed between the parties that the petitioner’s predecessor-in-interest would lease the subject property for 11 years from the end of the commitment c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top