[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Pankaj Rajpal vs Earthz Urban Spaces Pvt Ltd on 15 April, 2026
$~34 & 39
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision : 15.04.2026
+ O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 469/2025
PANKAJ RAJPAL .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Ranjana Roy Gawai, Ms.
Vasudha Sen, Ms. K.Hema &
Ms. Somya Pandey, Advs.
versus
EARTHZ URBAN SPACES PVT LTD .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Avishkar Singhvi, Mr.
Naved Ahmed, Ms. Anam
Siddiqui & Mr. Akash Raja
Sahib, Advs.
39
+ O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 128/2026 & I.A. 8220/2026 (Seeking
permission to file lengthy synopsis and list of dates)
EARTHZ URBAN SPACES PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Avishkar Singhvi, Mr.
Naved Ahmed, Ms. Anam
Siddiqui & Mr. Akash Raja
Sahib, Advs.
versus
PANKAJ RAJPAL .....Respondent
Through: Ms. Ranjana Roy Gawai, Ms.
Vasudha Sen, Ms. K.Hema &
Ms. Somya Pandey, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN
SHANKAR
% JUDGEMENT (ORAL)
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.
1. The present Petition, being O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 469/2025, has
been filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
19961 seeking the following reliefs:
"a. Direct the Respondent for removal of its workforce, equipment
and unutilised material lying at the Subject Property in front of a
court appointed local commissioner;
b. Direct the Respondent to provide rendition of accounts of all
expenses till date (along with supporting invoices and proof of
payment), which were borne exclusively by the Respondent
towards the work done on the Subject Property;
c. Appoint a Local Commissioner to inspect the status of
completion of the redevelopment work at the Subject Property and
to prepare inventory of material belonging to the Respondent and
present a report before to this Hon'ble Court in that respect;
d. Direct the Respondent to return the photocopy of the documents
provided by the Petitioner as per Schedule-B of the Collaboration
Agreement along with the Special Power of Attorney executed in
favour of the Respondent;
e. Injunct the Respondent from mis-utilising the Documents
provided by the Petitioner to the Respondent;
f. Direct the Respondent to refrain from representing itself as the
Developer of the Subject Property either directly or indirectly, in
any manner whatsoever;
g. Direct the Respondent to refrain from creating any third-party
rights with respect to the Developer's Allocation of the Subject
Property;
h. Pass an Order of ex-parte, ad-interim injunction in the favour of
the Petitioner and against the Respondent restraining, injuncting
and directing the Respondent, its associates, servants , and/ or
agents either individually, jointly and/or in association with third
parties, with respect to the prayers a to g;
i. Pass any other or further such order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present
case."
2. The Petition being O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 128/2026 has also been
Act
filed under Section 9 of the Act seeking the following reliefs:
"a. Pass an order of interim injunction restraining the Respondent,
his agents, representatives, servants or any person acting on his
behalf from in any manner interfering with, obstructing, or causing
any hindrance to the Petitioner in carrying out construction
activities at the subject property;
b. Direct the Respondent, to execute a Special Power of Attorney
in favour of the Petitioner, in terms of the Collaboration
Agreement, to enable and facilitate completion of construction at
the subject property;
c. Direct the Respondent to cooperate in obtaining the Completion
Certificate which is pending for Respondent's signature since
December 2025;
d. Pass an interim mandatory direction directing the Respondent to
sign and execute the completion certificate and/or any other
requisite documents, as contemplated under the Collaboration
Agreement, upon completion of construction by the Petitioner;
e. Direct the Respondent to secure and/or deposit a sum of
₹5,00,00,000/- (Rupees Five Crores only) before this Hon'ble
Court, or furnish appropriate security to the satisfaction of this
Hon'ble Court, towards damages suffered and likely to be suffered
by the Petitioner;
f. Pass an order restraining the Respondent from terminating,
rescinding, cancelling, or acting in furtherance of any purported
termination of the Collaboration Agreement, during the pendency
of the arbitral proceedings;
g. Pass such other or further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present
case."
3. Learned counsel appearing for the parties are ad idem that
instead of adjudicating the present matter on merits, the disputes may
be referred to arbitration by the learned Sole Arbitrator.
4. It is apposite to note here the Dispute Resolution Clause as
envisaged in the Collaboration Agreement dated 30.01.20232 is at
Agreement
Clause 10, which reads as under:
"10. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
10.1 In case of any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection
with this Agreement, the Parties shall first seek to resolve the
dispute or claim by negotiation. Any party may notify the other
Party of its desire to enter into consultation to resolve a dispute or
claim. If no solution can be arrived at in between the Parties for a
continuous period of 4 (four) weeks then the non-defaulting party
can invoke the arbitration clause and refer the disputes to
arbitration wherein a sole arbitrator shall be appointed mutually by
both the parties as per Indian Arbitration Act, 1996 and the
decision of the Arbitrators shall be final and binding in between the
parties hereto. The venue of Arbitration shall be New-Delhi."
5. Since the parties have mutually consented to adjudication of
their disputes by way of Arbitration and to the appointment of a Sole
Arbitrator, this Court is of the view that the commencement of arbitral
proceedings should not be unduly delayed.
6. Accordingly, in the peculiar facts of the present case, the
requirement of issuance of a Notice under Section 21 of the Act and
initiation of separate proceedings under Section 11 of the Act is
dispensed with.
7. In view thereof, this Court is of the view that the matter may be
referred to arbitration by a Sole Arbitrator for the purpose of the
resolution of disputes between the parties.
8. The material on record indicates that the valuation of the
present disputes are stated to be approximately Rs. 5 Crores.
9. Accordingly, this Court hereby requests Mr. Sanjeev
Mahajan, Advocate (Mobile No. 9811156437), as the Sole
Arbitrator to enter upon the reference and adjudicate the disputes inter
se the parties.
10. The learned Sole Arbitrator may proceed with the arbitration
proceedings, subject to furnishing to the parties the requisite
disclosures as required under Section 12(2) of the Act within a week
of entering into the reference.
11. The respective costs of arbitration shall be borne equally by the
parties.
12. All rights and contentions of the parties are kept open, to be
decided by the learned Sole Arbitrator on their merits, in accordance
with law.
13. Needless to state, nothing in this order shall be construed as an
expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the controversy.
14. Accordingly, the present Petitions under Section 9 of the Act
shall be treated as Applications under Section 17 of the Act, and
appropriate directions may be passed by the learned Arbitrator after
entering upon the reference. The learned Arbitrator is requested to
adjudicate upon the Applications expeditiously.
15. The Registry is directed to send a receipt of this order to the
learned Arbitrator through all permissible modes, including through e-
mail.
16. The present Petition, along with pending Application(s), if any,
stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
17. A photocopy of the Order passed today be kept in the connected
matter.
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.
APRIL 15, 2026/v/va
