NyayAI Legal Knowledge Graph — Public Judgment & Act Pages (validation build, unlisted) — Search

ARB.P./390/2018 of ARC OUTDOOR MEDIA PVT. LTD. Vs EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

Court
Delhi High Court
Decision date
2018-12-13
Case number
390 of 2018

Parties

Cites (1)

Statutes cited (1)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Body

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ARB.P. 390/2018 ARC OUTDOOR MEDIA PVT. LTD. ARC OUTDOOR MEDIA PVT. LTD.

..... Petitioner

Through Mr. Karan Sharma and Mr. Mohit Siwah, Advs.

versus

EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

..... Respondent

Through Ms. Biji Rajesh and Mr. Aman Bakshi, Advs for Mr. Gaurang Kanth, Standing Counsel.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

% 13.12.2018 1 This is petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short ‘1996 Act’).

2 Upon notice being issued in the petition, pleadings stand

completed.

3 I have queried learned counsel for the respondent as to why the instant petition is being resisted. Ms. Biji Rajesh, who, appears for the respondent, says that while there is no dispute about the existence of an arbitration agreement, the objection of the respondent is that the ostensible dispute raised in the petition need not be agitated once again, as it has been adjudicated upon vide an Award dated 23.03.2017.

ARB.P. No.390/2018

Pg.1 of 2

3.1 I am told that this Award was rendered by Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Chief Law Officer of the respondent and involved the parties herein. 4 Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, refutes this submission advanced on behalf of the respondent.

5 To my mind, as long as there is no dispute with regard to the existence of the arbitration agreement, the petition would have to be allowed leaving it open to the respondent to agitate its defence that the issues raised by the petitioner stand already adjudicated upon in an earlier round of arbitration and stand covered by the Award dated 23.03.2017.

6 It is ordered accordingly.

7 Consequently, Mr. Mahavir Singhal, former Additional District Judge, Delhi (Mob. [REDACTED]), is appointed as an Arbitrator in the matter. Learned Arbitrator will be paid his fees in accordance with the provisions of Fourth Schedule appended to the 1996 Act.

7.1 The learned Arbitrator, before entering upon reference will file declaration as mandated by Section 12 and other attendant provisions of the 1996 Act.

8 The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

9 Dasti.

DECEMBER 13, 2018

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

ARB.P. No.390/2018

Pg.2 of 2