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

HIGH COURT OF DELHI
NARANGS INTERNATIONAL HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED – Respondent
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.)-294/2021



O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 294/2021

Page 1 of 23

$~9

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of Decision: 27th August, 2021

+

O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 294/2021 & I.A. 10860/2021

NARANGS INTERNATIONAL HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Kapil Sibal & Mr. Akhil Sibal,

Senior Advocates with Mr. Kshitiz

Garg, Mr. Anshum Jain, and Mr.

Rahul Kochal, Advocates.

versus

DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED ..... Respondent

Through:

Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Senior

Advocate with Mr Anuj Berry, Mr.

Chaitanya Safaya, Mr. Amit Bhandari

and Ms. Prerna Acharya, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

JUDGMENT

[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]

SANJEEV NARULA, J. (Oral):

1.

The present petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act, 1996 [hereinafter referred to as‘the Act’] has been filed

by the Lessee – Narangs International Hotels Pvt. Ltd. [hereinafter referred

to as“NIHPL”], seeking urgent interim relief against the Lessor – Delhi

International Airport Limited [hereinafter referred to as ‘DIAL’], being

aggrieved by DIAL’s email dated 02nd July 2021 asking NIHPL to initiate

steps for vacation of DIAL’s premises in view of the expiry of lease on 31st

August 2021.

2021:DHC:2652

O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 294/2021

Page 2 of 23

2.

NIHPL seeks the following urgent reliefs:

[C] Pass ad-interim ex parte orders in terms of the above prayers.”

3.

The facts leading to the filing of the present petition, as narrated

therein, are briefly captured below:

3.1.International Airports Authority of India granted lease of airport land

to NIHPL for the “purpose of carrying on flight catering business at

the Delhi Airport, Palam” for a period of 30 years (ending on 31st

August 2011), by way of a Lease Deed dated 20th August, 1982

[hereinafter referred to as‘Original Lease Deed’]. Clause 19 of the

General Conditions of Contract appended thereto contained an

arbitration clause.

3.2.The Delhi Airport / Palam Airportwas renamed in 1986 as the Indira

Gandhi International Airport [hereinafter referred to as ‘IGI Airport’

or the ‘Airport’]. The International Airports Authority of India was

renamed in 1995 as Airports Authority of India [hereinafter referred

to as ‘AAI’].

3.3.DIAL became AAI’s successor-in-interest for the Original Lease

Deed by way of an Operations, Maintenance and Development

2021:DHC:2652

O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 294/2021

Page 3 of 23

Agreement dated 04th April 2006, executed between AAI and DIAL,

in respect of IGI Airport. [hereinafter referred to as‘OMDA’]

3.4.The Original Lease Deed also provided “an option of extension upto

10 years” in its recital. Later, as recorded in the minutes of meeting

dated 27th November 2009 held between NIHPL, DIAL and AAI, the

lease was extended for a further period of 10 years (i.e. till 31st August

2021). A separate agreement was also entered into between NIHPL,

DIAL and AAI regarding the same in 2009 [hereinafter referred to as

the ‘Agreement dated 2009’]. Thus, NIHPL continues to operate at

the IGI Airport on the same terms and conditions as contained in the

Original Lease Deed, except for certain modifications as recorded in

the minutes of meeting referred above.

3.5.NIHPL contends that shortly thereafter, DIAL started pressurizing it

to enter into a license agreement instead of the lease, and threatened to

disallow access of airport to NIHPL for providing in-flight catering

services.

3.6.Faced with DIAL’s refusal to grant NIHPL’s personnel and vehicles

access to the Airport, NIHPL was constrained in 2013 to file a petition

under Section 9 of the Act for necessary reliefs, which included access

to the Airport. During the course of the proceedings, NIHPL and

DIAL executed a Supplementary Lease Agreement dated 17th May

2013 [hereinafter referred to as‘SLA’], on the basis whereof, the

Section 9 petition was withdrawn.1 The said agreement also contained

an arbitration clau

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top