Balister Tyagi vs Om Prakash Tyagi And Others
2015 Latest Caselaw 1086 Del

$~8
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     CS(OS) 1395/2010
      BALISTER TYAGI                             ..... Plaintiff
                    Through: Mr. Sandeep Garg, Advocate with
                    Ms. Mani Solanki, Advocate with plaintiff in
                    person.
                    versus
      OM PRAKASH TYAGI AND OTHERS                ..... Defendants
                    Through: Mr. Rajesh Raina, Advocate with
                    Mr. Virender Tyagi, Advocate for D-1.
                    Mr. Anuj Aggrwal, Advocate with Ms. Disha
                    Saxena, Advocate for D-2 with D-2 in person.
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

                        ORDER

% 05.02.2015

I.A. No.4313/2013 (by D-2 under Section 8 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996)

1. This order is in continuation of the order dated 28.1.2015. On

28.1.2015, learned counsel for the defendant No.2 had referred to the

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated 28.12.2005 executed by

the parties to the suit and stated that it contains an arbitration clause.

In response, counsel for the plaintiff had admitted that he had filed the

said MOU along with some other documents and in the course of

admission/denial of documents, the same has been marked as

Ex.-P-1. It was also not denied by him that Clause-(viii) of the MOU,

is the arbitration clause, whereudner all the parties had agreed that

their disputes would be referred to the four arbitrators named therein.

At that stage, it was enquired from the counsels for the parties that

since the arbitrators named in the MOU are of even number, in case of

a difference of opinion, who would act as an umpire. They were also

asked if they would be agreeable to appointing a sole arbitrator or

three arbitrators, from amongst those named in the MOU, or a judicial

officer, to arbitrate their disputes.

2. Today, counsels for the plaintiff, defendants No.1 and the

defendant No.2 jointly state that they have no objection to the

arbitration clause being given effect to and their inter se disputes

being referred for arbitration. They state that Shri Paritosh Tyagi, R/o

WZ-58A, Basai Darapur, New Delhi-110015, one of the arbitrators

named in the MOU be appointed as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate

the said disputes.

3. The remaining defendants have filed their written statements

stating inter alia that they do not have any right in the suit premises

or the business affairs of M/s Gulab Oil Mills and they have also

admitted to the execution of the MOU dated 28.12.2005.

4. In view of the aforesaid submission, the present application is

allowed. As agreed by the parties, Shri Paritosh Tyagi is appointed as

the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate all the disputes raised by the plaintiff

and the defendants No.1 and 2.

5. The parties are directed to file their respective claims before the

sole Arbitrator within four weeks, while exchanging copies thereof. The

parties shall appear before the sole Arbitrator on 19.02.2015, at 2 PM

for him to fix a date for conducting further proceedings. The sole

Arbitrator shall fix his own fees and communicate the same to the

parties who shall bear the same along with the out of pocket

expenses, to the extent of 1/3rd each.

6. The application is disposed of.

CS(OS) 1395/2010

In view of the orders passed in IA 4313/2013, an application

filed by the defendant No.2 under Section 8 of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act, 1996, wherein the parties have agreed to refer their

entire disputes, including those that are the subject matter of the

present suit, to Shri Paritosh Tyagi, the sole Arbitrator, in terms of the

MOU dated 28.12.2005, the suit is disposed of, while leaving the

parties to bear their own costs.

DASTI to the counsel for the plaintiff for communicating the

order to the Sole Arbitrator.

HIMA KOHLI, J FEBRUARY 05, 2015 sk/rkb