* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 06.04.2026 + O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 147/2026 & I.A. 9159/2026 (For Exemption)

T.A. REALTECH PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rakesh K. Khanna, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Rahul Sharma, Ms. Alka Agrawal, Mr. Yuvraj Sharma, Ms. Shruti Agrawal and Ms. Arushi Jindal, Advocates.

versus AMIT AGRAWAL & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Nalin Kohli, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Vinit Trehan, Ms. Urvi Syal, Mr.

Yash Srivastava, Ms. Bhumi Agarwal and Mr. Ayuushman Aroraa, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR % JUDGEMENT (ORAL)

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.

1. The present Petition has been filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, $~44 seeking the following reliefs:

“…..

a) Restrain Respondent No. 1, Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, their

1 Act

directors, agents, assigns or any person claiming through or under them, from selling, transferring, alienating, encumbering, parting with possession of, or creating any third-party rights in respect of the land bearing Khasra No. 1251 (ka) and 1252 (ka), Tehsil Mohan Lal Ganj, Lucknow, save and except strictly in accordance

with the procedure b) and mechanism prescribed under Clause 2.3.2 of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 07.01.2025, pending commencement and conclusion of arbitral proceedings; and/or c) Direct the Respondents to maintain status quo with respect to title, possession, nature and character of the subject land during the pendency of arbitral proceedings;

d) Grant ad-interim ex parte relief in terms of prayers (a) and (b)

above in view of the imminent threat of further alienation;

e) Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and in aid of the arbitral proceedings.”

2. The present disputes are stated to have arisen out of a Memorandum of Understanding dated 07.01.2025², which contains a dispute resolution clause, being Clause 8 of the MoU, which is reproduced hereunder for ready reference:

“8. GOVERNING LAW AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION

8.1 This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of Uttar Pradesh India. Any disputes arising out of or in connection with this Agreement shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts located in New Delhi, India.

8.2 Any disputes arising out of or in connection with this Agreement shall be resolved through arbitration/mediation/courts],with the venue at New Delhi.

The arbitration shall be conducted by a sole arbitrator, who shall be appointed by mutual consent of the parties within 30 days from the date of the written notice requesting arbitration. In case the parties cannot agree on an arbitrator, the Indian Council of Arbitration shall appoint the arbitrator(s)or the competent.

BindingDecision:

The decision of the arbitrator(s) shall be final and binding on all ⍰parties. The arbitrator(s) shall have the authority to award any

2 MoU

limited to damages, specific performance, or injunctive relief.”

3. After advancing some arguments, learned senior counsel appearing for the parties submit that they are ad idem that the disputes between them be referred to arbitration and that Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar (Retd.) be appointed as the learned Sole Arbitrator.

4. Since the parties have mutually consented to adjudication of their disputes by way of Arbitration and to the appointment of a Sole Arbitrator, this Court is of the view that the commencement of arbitral proceedings should not be unduly delayed.

5. Accordingly, in the peculiar facts of the present case, the requirement of issuance of a notice under Section 21 and initiation of separate proceedings under Section 11 of the Act is dispensed with.

6. In view thereof, this Court is of the view that the matter may be referred to arbitration by a Sole Arbitrator for the purpose of the resolution of disputes between the parties.

7. Accordingly, this Court hereby requests Hon’ble Mr. Justice (Retd.) Dr.