Suvidha Adlakha vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Ors
2015 Latest Caselaw 3728 Del

29.
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+     CS(OS) 1778/2010 & IAs No. 668/2011 and 11626/2010


                                                 Decided on 07.05.2015
IN THE MATTER OF:
SUVIDHA ADLAKHA                                     ..... Plaintiff
                        Through : Mr. Vikas Mahajan, Advocate with
                        the plaintiff in person.

                        versus

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ORS                ..... Defendants
                   Through : Mr. J.R. Sharma, Advocate
                   for D-2 & 3 with D-2 & 3 in person.


CORAM
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)

1. The plaintiff has instituted the present suit praying inter alia for

a decree of permanent injunction against the defendant No.1/NDMC

restraining the Department from converting Shop No.102, situated at

Sarojini Nagar Market, New Delhi from leasehold to freehold, till the

dispute between the parties in respect of the said shop is pending

before the learned Arbitrator or in any court. Apart from the said

relief, the plaintiff has also sought decrees of permanent injunction in

respect of the said shop, as prayed for in prayers (b) to (g).

2. It is stated by the counsel for the plaintiff that the defendants

No.2 to 4 are the brothers of the plaintiff and the defendants No.5 & 6

are the persons to whom the defendants No.2 & 3 have sold their

shares in the shop in question, as derived under the Deed of Family

Settlement dated 15.3.2005.

3. Counsel for the plaintiff submits that his client had filed an

application under Section 8 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996

invoking an arbitration clause governing the parties and vide order

dated 29.07.2010 passed in OMP 527/2009, Mr. Dinesh Dayal (Retd.

ADJ) was appointed as a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes

between the parties. Pursuant thereto, an Award dated 16.9.2013 has

been pronounced by the learned Arbitrator, who has returned a finding

in respect of a number of issues as framed on 25.2.2011 and on

25.5.2011. A copy of the award handed over by the learned counsel

for the plaintiff is taken on record. Learned counsel states that the

defendants No.2 & 3 be called upon to clarify as to whether they have

accepted the said award and if not, whether they have resorted to any

legal proceedings to challenge the said award.

4. Counsel for the defendants No.2 & 3 states, on instructions from

his clients, that they have not taken any steps to challenge the award

in question.

5. Counsel for the plaintiff states that in view of the submission

made by the counsel for the defendants No.2 & 3, he may be

permitted to withdraw the present suit, while reserving the right of his

client to seek execution of the award before the competent court, in

accordance with law.

6. Leave, as prayed for, is granted. The suit is disposed of , along

with the pending applications. No orders as to costs.

                                                    (HIMA KOHLI)
MAY 07, 2015                                           JUDGE
sk/rkb