Delhi High Court
Vikas Kumar Jain vs Rishi Vashishtha & Anr. on 18 November, 2024
Author: Sachin Datta
Bench: Sachin Datta
$~10
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision : 18.11.2024
+ ARB.P. 1183/2024
VIKAS KUMAR JAIN .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. H.K. Shekhar, Mr. Ranjeet Singh,
Advs.
versus
RISHI VASHISHTHA & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. M.L. Yadav, Mr. Mahesh Saxena,
Mr. Harish Chand, Advs. for (R-1)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA
SACHIN DATTA, J. (Oral)
1. The present petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the A&C Act") seeks
constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal to adjudicate the disputes between the
parties.
2. The disputes between the parties have arisen in the context of an
Agreement to Sell dated 26.01.2024 (hereinafter 'agreement to sell') entered
into with respect to property bearing no. 284/7, area measuring 5.85 Sq.
Mtrs. i.e., 7 Sq Yds., consisting of (i) shop on ground floor, having its
covered area 5.85 Sq. Mtrs., with proportionate undivided share in the land
underneath, (i) First floor with roof/terrace rights, with the rights of upper
floor & further construction upto the last storey, having its covered area 5.85
Sq. Mtrs., with proportionate undivided share in the land underneath, out of
Khasra No. 792, situated in the abadi of Doongar Mohalla, Pandav Road,
Vishwas Nagar, in the area of village Chandrawali alias Shahdara, Illaqa
Shahadra, Delhi-110032, (hereinafter called 'the said property').
3. Vide the said agreement to sell, the petitioner agreed to purchase the
property from the respondent no.1 for a consideration of Rs. 35,00,000/-
(Rupees thirty five lakhs only), out of which, the petitioner allegedly paid an
amount of Rs. 1,00,000 on 26.01.2024 and Rs. 2,50,000/- on 27.01.2024.
4. It is stated that the remaining amount was to be paid at the time of
registration of the sale deed. According to the petitioner, the respondent
could not adhere to the terms of the agreement to sell and hence the disputes
arose between the parties.
5. The agreement to sell contains an arbitration clause as under:-
"CLAUSE 7 OF AGREEMENT TO SELL DATED 26.01.2024"
"That if there is any dispute arises between the parties then both the
parties can appoint the arbitrator either with mutual consent or by court
of law and arbitrator will decide according to arbitration act and same
will be binding on parties."
6. Learned counsel for the respondent while not disputing the existence
of the arbitration agreement, strongly refutes the contentions sought to be
raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the merits of the matter.
Needless to say, the same would be gone into by a duly constituted Arbitral
Tribunal. Since the existence of the arbitration clause is evident from a
perusal of the said agreement to sell, there is no impediment in appointing
an independent sole arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes between the
parties as prayed for, as mandated in terms of the judgments of the Supreme
Court in SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Krish Spinning, 2024 INSC
532 and Interplay between Arbitration Agreements under the Arbitration
& Conciliation Act, 1996 & the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, In re, 2023 SCC
OnLine SC 1666.
7. Accordingly, Ms. Shreya Singhal, Advocate (Mob.: 9811747392) is
appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the
parties under the aforesaid agreements.
8. Respondents shall be entitled to raise appropriate objections as
regards jurisdiction/ arbitrability, if any, before the learned sole arbitrator
which shall be duly considered by the learned sole arbitrator in accordance
with law.
9. The learned Sole Arbitrator may proceed with the arbitration
proceedings subject to furnishing to the parties requisite disclosure as
required under Section 12 of the A&C Act; and in the event there is any
impediment to the appointment on that count, the parties are given liberty to
file an appropriate application in this court.
10. The learned Sole Arbitrator shall be entitled to fee in accordance with
IVth Schedule to the A&C Act; or as may otherwise be agreed to between
the parties and the learned Sole Arbitrator.
11. All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the
claims/counter-claims are kept open, to be decided by the learned Arbitrator
on their merits, in accordance with law.
12. Needless to say, nothing in this order shall be construed as an
expression of this court on the merits of the case.
13. The present petition stands disposed of in the above terms.
SACHIN DATTA, J
NOVEMBER 18, 2024/uk
