Public excerpt
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.)/411/2024 of M/S COMBITIC GLOBAL CAPLET PVT LTD Vs M/S AMBIKA REALCON DEVELOPERS PVT LTD - High Court of Delhi (High Court of Delhi)
Court: High Court of Delhi (High Court of Delhi)
Case: DLHC010885732024
Parties: O.M.P.(I) (COMM.)/411/2024 of M/S COMBITIC GLOBAL CAPLET PVT LTD Vs M/S AMBIKA REALCON DEVELOPERS PVT LTD
Pages: 3
Characters (full): 5144
Full judgment text and the official PDF are available after sign-in. This page shows an excerpt for discovery and research previews only.
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 411/2024 Page 1 of 3
$~94
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%
Date of Decision : 09.12.2024
+
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 411/2024, I.A. No. 47059/2024, 47061/2024
M/S COMBITIC GLOBAL CAPLET PVT LTD .....Petitioner
Through:
Mr. Sacchin Puri (Sr. Adv.) along
with Mr. Vikas Deep, Mr. Sonu
Kumar, Ms. Ashna Bhola, Mr.
Fardeen Khan, Ms. Nidhi Jain, Advs.
versus
M/S AMBIKA REALCON DEVELOPERS PVT LTD .....Respondent
Through:
Mr. Puneet Bali (Sr. Adv) along with
Mr. Aditya Soni, Mr. Rajat Gautam,
Mr. Divyan Shrivastava, Mr. S.S.
Shekhawat, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA
SACHIN DATTA, J. (Oral)
1.
The present petition has been filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration
and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter ‘the A&C Act’) seeking urgent
interim orders, in the context of an agreement dated 30.01.2019 [amended
by ‘superseding agreement’ dated 18.07.2020].
2.
It is stated that in terms of the said agreement, the petitioner is entitled
to consideration, with an absolute right, title and interest in the ‘net surplus’
in the ratio prescribed therein. Disputes between the parties have arisen
since the petitioner has not been given its alleged entitlement under the
agreement, including the ‘net surplus’ in the ratio as prescribed in the
agreement.
Digitally Signed By:ROHIT
KUMAR PATEL
Signing Date:14.12.2024
23:09:45
Signature Not Verified
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 411/2024 Page 2 of 3
3.
Learned senior counsel for the respondent strongly refutes the
interpretation sought to be accorded by the petitioner to the agreement in
question ; he submits that the entitlement of the petitioner would arise only
after the entire project is over and all the units are sold.
4.
The parties are clearly at variance as to the manner in which the
contract is to be construed and implemented. Admittedly however, the
agreement between the parties contains an arbitration clause as under:-
“That in the event of any disputes arising under, in connection
with, incidental to and/or in interpretation of scope of this
Agreement or relating thereto, or any Agreement that may follow,
the parties shall try to resolve the same amicably failing which the
same shall be referred to any arbitrator to be appointed mutually
by the Parties and its decision shall be final and conclusive. The
provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 and the
statutory modifications/ amendments and/or re-enactment thereof
from time to time shall apply to such arbitration. The place of
arbitration shall be Delhi and the parties bear and pay their own
costs, charges and expenses of the proceedings of Arbitration.”
5.
Respective counsel for the parties are in agreement and jointly request
that an independent Sole Arbitrator be appointed by this Court in these
proceedings itself to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.
6.
Accordingly, as jointly prayed, Ms. Justice (Retd.) Hima Kohli,
Former Judge, Supreme Court of India, (Mob. No.: +91 9871300036) be
appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the
parties.
7.
The respondent shall be entitled to raise preliminary objections as
regards jurisdiction/arbitrability, which shall be decided by the learned
arbitrator, in accordance with law.
8.
The learned Sole Arbitrator may proceed with the arbitration
proceedings subject to furnishing to the parties the requisite disclosures as
Digitally Signed By:ROHIT
KUMAR PATEL
Signing Date:14.12.2024
23:09:45
Signature Not Verified
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 411/2024 Page 3 of 3
…