Delhi High Court
Royale Blue Club Private Limited, vs Oyo Hotels And Homes Private ... on 30 July, 2020
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ARB.P. 242/2020 and I.As.5725/2020, I.A.5728/2020
ROYALE BLUE CLUB PRIVATE LTD ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Shivanshu Kumar, Mr.
Sunil Kr. Gandhi, Mr. Dipender
Chauhan, Mr. Kunal Kumar and
Mr. Shobhit Chandra Sharma,
Advs.
versus
OYO HOTELS AND HOMES PRIVATE LTD .... Respondent
Through: Mr. Jayant Mehta, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
% 30.07.2020
(Video-conferencing)
1. This petition and O.M.P.(I) (COMM) 189/2020 are cognate
proceedings arising between the parties.
2. Arbitral disputes are stated to have arisen. The arbitration
agreement between the parties, as contained in Article 10 of the
Management Services Agreement, dated 30th August, 2019, reads
thus:
"ARTICLE 10: DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND
GOVERNING LAWS
10.1 Arbitration: All disputes arising under this Agreement
shall be resolved by a sole arbitrator mutually appointed by
the parties, in accordance with the provisions of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. In case the parties
fail to mutually appoint the sole arbitrator within 15 days
from the date on which a notice to initiate resolution of a
dispute through arbitration has been raised by a Party, the sole
arbitrator shall be appointed the Delhi High Court. The seat
of arbitration shall be New Delhi and the language shall be
English.
10.2 Jurisdiction: Subject to foregoing courts at New Delhi
shall have exclusive jurisdiction in all matters arising out of
this Agreement.
10.3 Governing Law: This Agreement and any other
Agreement between the parties shall be governed and
construed in accordance with the laws of the Republic of
India."
3. It appears that, by following the procedure prescribed in the
afore-extracted clause from the Management Services Agreement, the
parties have not been able to arrive at a consensus, regarding the sole
arbitrator to be appointed, to adjudicate on the disputes between them.
It is averred, in the petition, that the petitioner wrote, to the
respondent, on 30th May, 2019, invoking the afore-extracted
arbitration clause and suggesting the names of certain retired
Additional District Judges, for nomination as arbitrators. The
respondent, apparently has not agreed.
4. As such, the machinery for arbitration, as provided in the
Management Services Agreement has failed.
5. Before me, both learned Counsel submit, ad idem, that this
Court may appoint any retired Additional District Judge/District Judge
to be the sole arbitrator to arbitrate on the disputes between them.
6. In view thereof, I appoint Mr. G.P. Thareja, a highly respected
retired Additional District & Sessions Judge, Delhi, (resident of D-
201, Priyadarshini Vihar, Patparganj, New Delhi-110092, Mobile No.
9899664642) to arbitrate on the disputes between the parties. The
learned sole arbitrator would be entitled to fees in accordance with the
Fourth schedule to the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996.
7. The parties may contact Mr. G.P. Thareja, at the telephone
number provided hereinabove within 48 hours, so as to fix a schedule
for the arbitration proceedings.
8. The learned sole arbitrator would also make the necessary
disclosure, in accordance with Section 12 of the 1996 Act, within a
period of one week from entering on the reference.
9. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
I.A.5725/2020 and I.A.5728/2020 in ARB.P. 242/2020
In view of the disposal of Arb.P.242/2020, these applications are also
stand disposed of.
C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
JULY 30, 2020/kr
