2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 4127
ARB.P. 1278/2023
Page 1 of 3
$~3
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+
ARB.P. 1278/2023
AMBER A BAVISHI HUF
..... Petitioner
Through:
Mr. Ashutosh Tiwari, Mr. Anuj
Srivastava
and
Mr.
Shubham
Kapoor, Advocates.
versus
HAVELLS INDIA LIMITED
..... Respondent
Through:
Mr. Divyansh Jain, Mr. Madhav R.
Bera and Mr. Dennis T Panmei,
Advocates.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
ASHUTOSH KUMAR TIWARI
%
23.01.2024
1.
The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 11 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [“the Act”] for appointment of an
arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties under an
Agreement dated 27.12.2014 and two addendums thereto.
2.
The record reveals that the parties had entered into a lease
agreement dated 01.10.2011 with regard to a property bearing No. 304 to
307, JP Towers, Tagore Road, Rajkot-360002. They thereafter signed
two agreements on 27.12.2014, one entitled “Agreement of Conducting”
and the other entitled as “Services Agreement”. Mr. Ashutosh Tiwari,
learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner seeks
adjudication of disputes under the “Agreement of Conducting”.
3.
The two addendums placed on record are entitled, “Addendum to
Service Agreement” and “Addendum to Lease Deed”, both dated
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/01/2024 at 00:35:54
Page 2 of 3
08.04.2022. It is the contention of Mr. Tiwari, that these are, in fact,
addendums to the “Agreement of Conducting”. Mr. Divyansh Jain,
learned counsel for the respondent, disputes this contention.
4.
In view of the fact that the lease deed contains an Arbitration
clause [Clause 24], which provides for arbitration to be held in Rajkot,
Mr. Jain initially raised a jurisdictional dispute to the present petition
being filed in this Court. However, Mr. Tiwari reiterates that the relief
sought in this petition is appointment of an arbitrator under the
“Agreement of Conducting”, and not under the lease deed. The said
agreement contains an arbitration clause [Clause 13], which provides for
arbitration to be held in Delhi. The petitioner also invoked the arbitration
clause by a letter dated 01.07.2023, to which no reply was received.
5.
Mr. Jain has taken instructions and submits that, in view of the
aforesaid clarification, the Court may appoint an independent arbitrator,
leaving all questions with regard to applicability of the addendums,
maintainability and merits of the claim open for consideration of the
learned arbitrator.
6.
Mr. Jain also states that the respondent would like to make an
attempt to resolve the disputes in mediation. Mr. Tiwari has no objection
to a reference to mediation, but submits that an arbitrator may also be
appointed with a request to defer the proceedings for a short time.
7.
The petition is disposed of with the consent of learned counsel for
the parties with the following directions:
a. The parties are referred to mediation under the aegis of Samadhan,
Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Shershah
Road, New Delhi-110503.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/01/2024 at 00:35:54
Page 3 of 3
b. They will appear before the learned Mediator on 30.01.2024.
c. In the event the mediation proceedings are unsuccessful, the
disputes between the parties under the “Agreement of Conducting”
dated 27.12.2014 will be adjudicated by arbitration under the aegis
of Delhi International Arbitration Centre, Delhi High Court,
Shershah Road, New Delhi [“DIAC”]. DIAC is requested to
nominate an Arbitrator from its panel.
d. The arbitration proceedings will be governed by the Rules of
DIAC, including as to remuneration of the learned Arbitrator.
e. The learned Arbitrator is requested to furnish a declaration under
Section 12 of the Act, prior to entering upon the reference.
f. In order to give the parties an opportunity to settle their disputes,
DIAC is requested not to take further steps in the arbitration
proceedings until 31.03.2023. If the mediation proceedings are still
pending, the parties may jointly request the DIAC for a further
adjournment.
8.
It is made clear that all rights and contentions of the parties,
including on the a