Delhi High Court
Sarens Heavy Lift India Private ... vs Gammon-Construtora ... on 27 October, 2021
$~6 & 48 (original)
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ARB.P. 760/2021
SARENS HEAVY LIFT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dibya Nishant, Mr. Ryan
Singh and Ms. BItisha Singh, Advs.
versus
GAMMON-CONSTRUTORA CIDADE-TENSACCIAI JV
..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Aditya Dev Triguna, Adv.
+ O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 279/2021
SARENS HEAVY LIFT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dibya Nishant, Mr. Ryan
Singh and Ms. BItisha Singh, Advs.
versus
GAMMON-CONSTRUTORA CIDADE-TENSACCIAI JV
..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Aditya Dev Triguna, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
O R D E R (O R A L)
% 27.10.2021
ARB.P. 760/2021 and O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 279/2021
1. Learned Counsel for the respondent does not oppose reference
of the disputes between the parties to arbitration and suggests that
OMP (I) (Comm) 279/2021 could be referred to the learned arbitrator
Signature Not Verified
By:SUNIL SINGH NEGI
Signing Date:30.10.2021
22:18:20
to be decided as an application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996.
2. The prayer in OMP (I) (Comm) 279/2021 reads thus:
"In view of the facts and circumstances explained above, the
Petitioner herein most humbly and respectfully prays that this
Hon'ble Court may [be] pleased to:
a. Direct the Respondent to furnish adequate
security in the form of Bank Guarantee issued by a
Nationalized Bank in India or such other security as
this Hon'ble Court deems fit that cover the entire
amount of Rs. 2,23,62,907/-; and/or
b. Alternatively, direct the Respondent to deposit
with this Hon'ble Court an amount of Rs. Rs.
2,23,62,907/- by way of interest-bearing Fixed Deposit
until conclusion of arbitration proceedings; and/or
c. Pass any other or further Order (s) as this
Hon'ble Court deem fit in the facts and circumstances
of the case."
3. As the prayers of the petitioner do not seek any injunction, but
merely seek securing of the amount in dispute in the arbitral
proceedings, I am of the opinion that the suggestion, of learned
Counsel for the respondent, for the prayer being referred for decision
to the learned Arbitrator under Section 17 of the 1996 Act, deserves to
be accepted.
4. In view thereof, both these petitions are disposed of in the
following terms:
Signature Not Verified
By:SUNIL SINGH NEGI
Signing Date:30.10.2021
22:18:20
(i) Mr.Avadh Bihari Kaushik, Advocate [Cell
No.9811455431 and E-mail ID : [email protected]] is
appointed as the Arbitrator to arbitrate on the disputes between
the parties.
(ii) The Arbitrator would be entitled to charge fees in
accordance with the Fourth Schedule to the 1996 Act or as
otherwise fixed by him in consultation with learned Counsel for
the parties.
(iii) The learned Arbitrator is requested to file the requisite
disclosure under Section 12(2) of the 1996 Act within a week of
entering on the reference.
(iv) OMP (I) (Comm) 279/2021 stands referred for
adjudication by the learned Arbitrator, who shall treat OMP (I)
(Comm) 279/2021 as an application under Section 17 of the
1996 Act, without the petitioner being required to file a fresh
application before the learned Arbitrator.
5. Both the petitions stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
C. HARI SHANKAR, J
OCTOBER 27, 2021/kr
Signature Not Verified
By:SUNIL SINGH NEGI
Signing Date:30.10.2021
22:18:20
