AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
16 paragraphs · 579 wordsHemant Gupta, J.
CM No. 16542-CII of 2011
Exemption is allowed as prayed for.
CM No. 16543-CII of 2011
Application is allowed. Written statement along with Annexures R-1 and R-2 is taken on record.
Arb. Case No. 102 of 2010
Petitioner has sought appointment of an Arbitrator in respect of the dispute arising out of lease of Shop No. GF-4 leased to Respondent in a building known as "Flamez Mall" at 755, Gurdev Nagar, Ludhiana, Punjab vide the lease deed dated 7.1.2008. The said Agreement has an arbitration clause which reads as under:
Dispute resolution
(a) If any dispute arises between the parties hereto during the subsistence of this agreement or thereafter, in connection with the validity, interpretation, implementation or alleged material breach of any provision of this Agreement or regarding a question including the question as to whether the termination of this agreement by one party hereto has been legitimate, the parties hereto shall endeavor to settle such dispute amicably. The attempt to bring about an amicable settlement is considered to have failed as soon as one of the parties hereto, after reasonable attempts which attempt shall continue for not less than 30 days, gives notice thereof to the other parties in writing.
(b) All disputes, controversies and differences of opinion arising out of or in connection with this agreement or for the breach hereof which cannot be settled amicably by the parties hereto, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the sole arbitrator to be appointed by mutual consent, failing which by the Hon''ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The parties shall appoint/take steps to appoint the sole arbitrator within 15 days of receiving a notice from the other party in accordance with Clause 7(a) above. The venue of arbitration shall be New Delhi. The parties shall continue to fulfill their obligations under this Agreement pending the final resolution of the dispute and the Parties shall not have the right to suspend their obligations under this Agreement by virtue of any dispute being referred to arbitration.
The Petitioner served a notice dated 14.7.2009 to Respondent in respect of resolution of the dispute arising out of the aforesaid lease deed by an arbitrator. Since, the arbitrator was not appointed, the Petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of this Court for appointment of an Arbitrator.
In reply, the stand of the Respondent is that the parties have not entered into any lease deed dated 7.1.2008 but in fact the lease deed is dated 17.8.2007. It is also admitted by learned Counsel for the Respondent that such lease deed is pari-materia except the authorized signatory of the Respondent mentioned by the Petitioner in the lease deed produced and the lease deed which is admittedly executed by Respondent.
The question whether the parties entered into a lease deed dated 17.8.2007 or 7.1.2008 is again a disputed question which is required to be decided by an Arbitrator.
The similar dispute in respect of the other shops in the same building has been referred to Hon''ble Mr. Justice V.S. Aggarwal, former judge of this Court.
In view of the said fact, Hon''ble Mr. Justice V.S. Aggarwal, former judge of this Court resident of H. No. C-52, Soami Nagar, New Delhi-17 is appointed as the arbitrator to decide the dispute between the parties. Learned Arbitrator shall fix his fee in consultation with the parties.
Disposed of.