ARB.P. 194/2022

Page 1 of 19

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Judgment delivered on: October 31, 2022

+

ARB.P. 194/2022

M/S SEQUOIA FITNESS AND SPORTS TECHNOLOGY

PVT. LTD.

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Himanshu Mahajan, Adv.

versus

GD GOENKA PVT. LTD. & ORS.

..... Respondent

Through:

Mr. Advait Ghosh, Adv. for

R-2 to R-4

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

J U D G M E N T

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

1.

At the outset, I may state, the learned counsel for the petitioner

had on May 27, 2022, made a statement that he shall press this petition

qua respondents 2 to 4 and not against respondent No.1. Hence, the

present petition is being considered for appointment of sole Arbitrator

qua respondents 2 to 4.

2.

This is a petition filed under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration

& Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, „A&C Act, 1996‟) with the

following prayers:

Digitally Signed By:ASHEESH

KUMAR YADAV

Signing Date:01.11.2022

09:57:11

Signature Not Verified

ARB.P. 194/2022

Page 2 of 19

conscience.”

3.

In the present case Sequoia Fitness and Sports Technology Pvt.

Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as „Petitioner‟) is a Company incorporated

under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered

office at 2216, D2 Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 and principal

office at 127, 1^st Floor, Tower B3, SpazeITech Park, Sohna Road,

Sector 49, Gurugram, Haryana-122018.

4.

On the other hand, respondent No.1 / (GD Goenka Pvt. Ltd.) is

running schools in the name and style of GD Goenka International

School at Naukuchiatal. Distt., Nainital / (respondent No. 2) and GD

Goenka International School, Kashipur / (respondent No. 3). It is

submitted that respondent No.1 is a private limited company

incorporated under the relevant provisions of the erstwhile Companies

Act, 1956, having its registered office at N-85, Connaught Place, New

Delhi-110001.

5.

According to the facts of this case, the petitioner emailed the

profile of the Company to the respondents for entering into a sports

Digitally Signed By:ASHEESH

KUMAR YADAV

Signing Date:01.11.2022

09:57:11

Signature Not Verified

ARB.P. 194/2022

Page 3 of 19

training and coaching arrangement, called the „Fitness 365’

(hereinafter referred to as „Program‟) for the students studying in the

schools being operated by the respondent No.1 on November 05, 2018.

Thereafter, several rounds of meetings were held between the

petitioner and the respondent No.4 for conducting the program offered

by the petitioner in the schools operated by respondent Nos.2 and 3.

That apart, an In-person meeting was also held on November 24, 2018

between the respondents and the petitioner, AT Templeton Head

Office, Nainital.

6.

It is the case of the petitioner that it shared the copy of the

proposal-cum-agreement for conducting the Program during the

meeting dated March 16, 2019. The proposal contained exhaustive

terms & conditions including arbitration clause clearly stipulating,

referring of the disputes arising out of the proposal-cum-agreement to

the Arbitral Tribunal consisting of a sole arbitrator.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF THE PETITIONER

7.

Mr. Himanshu Mahajan, the learned counsel for the petitioner

submitted, the respondents had orally accepted the proposal and the

terms & conditions stipulated thereof. On verbal assurances given by

the respondents, the petitioner had posted one coach on April 13, 2019,

with respondent No.3, and thereafter three more coaches on April 14,

2019. Consequently, a set of three more coaches were also provided to

respondent No.3 during the week starting from April 14, 2019, for

conducting the sports training program as per the agreed proposal-

cum-agreement .

8.

He submitted that the petitioner also deployed three middle-

Digitally Signed By:ASHEESH

KUMAR YADAV

Signing Date:01.11.2022

09:57:11

Signature Not Verified

ARB.P. 194/2022

Page 4 of 19

level staff members and one senior staff member for visiting and

interacting