Delhi High Court
Ms Tempo Appliances P Ltd vs Mrs Khalida Begum & Ors. on 22 February, 2022
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 22.02.2022
+ ARB.P. 1095/2021
MS TEMPO APPLIANCES P LTD ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Tanishq Panwar, Adv.
versus
MRS KHALIDA BEGUM & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Rashid Hashmi, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 11
(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of
arbitrator for adjudication of disputes with respondent in terms of clause 12
of the agreement dated 01.05.2017.
2. Petitioner is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act,
1956 and engaged in the business of trading of pressure cookers and cook
wares. Petitioner claims to be the owner and in possession of land
measuring 3842 sq. yards comprising of Khasra No.13/13/2 and 13/18/1,
Sector 35, Begampur Khataula Industrial Area, HSIIDC, District-Gurugram,
Haryana having purchased from its previous owner through three registered
sale deeds bearing registration No.2984 Additional Book No.1 Volume No.
868 at pages 3-4 dated 28.05.1997; registration No.2985 Additional Book
No.1 Volume No. 868 at pages 5-6 dated 28.05.1997 and registration
No.4732 Additional Book No.1 Volume No. 571 at pages L7-18 dated
03.07.1997 respectively.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the year 2003-04,
the Government of Haryana started the process of acquiring large chunk of
land in the vicinity, including the land of the petitioner which falls in the
industrial zone. Hence, the petitioner along with other persons filed writ
petition before the Punjab & Haryana High Court being CWP
No.19330/2005 wherein vide order dated 28.01.2011, the said Court
released the entire land except these lands which form parts of the
roads/green belts or common sites or public utility service/area etc. In
rebuttal, State of Haryana filed Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India, however, the same was dismissed vide order dated
26.08.2011. In pursuance to order dated 28.01.2011, Government of
Haryana released the land of the petitioner from its acquisition. In
compliance of the abovesaid directions, the petitioner applied for change of
land use on 19.02.2014 and 30.06.2015 before Municipal Corporation of
Gurgaon and District Town & Country Planning Gurgaon/Chandigarh.
4. Learned counsel next submitted that in the month of May, 2017,
petitioner and respondents including Shamim Ahmed (now deceased)
entered into an agreement to sell and purchase dated 01.05.2017 of the land
measuring 1925 sq. yards out of 3842 sq. yards comprising of Khasra
No.13/13/2 and 13/18/1, Sector 35, Begampur Khataula Industrial Area,
HSIIDC, District-Gurugram, Haryana and in terms of the said agreement,
respondent has only paid Rs.16,15,000/- till date. Shamim Ahmed expired
on 30.11.2020 leaving behind the respondents as his legal heirs. As both the
parties did not take any action to complete the agreement, the same has
lapsed and hence, it requires cancellation. Subsequently, on 05.10.2021,
petitioner invoked arbitration in terms of Clause- 12 of the agreement
seeking appointment of sole arbitrator. However, respondents did not
respond to the same. Hence, the present petition has been filed.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has submitted
that the claims raised in the present petition are disputed, however, fairly
conceded that the disputes inter se parties are arbitrable. Learned counsel
also submitted that respondent has no objection if disputes are referred to an
independent arbitrator appointed by this Court.
6. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and Mr. Justice (Retd.)
Devinder Gupta (Mobile: 9818065456) is appointed sole arbitrator to
adjudicate the disputes between the parties.
7. The fee of the learned Arbitrator shall be governed by the Fourth
Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
8. The learned Arbitrator shall ensure compliance of Section 12 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before commencing the arbitration.
9. With aforesaid, the present petition is disposed of accordingly.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 22, 2022
ab
