Delhi High Court - Orders
Prime Interglobe Private Limited vs Super Milk Products Private Limited on 16 May, 2023
Author: Prateek Jalan
Bench: Prateek Jalan
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ARB.P. 337/2023
PRIME INTERGLOBE PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Mr. Nikhil
Kohli, Mr. Kushank Garg,
Advocates.
versus
SUPER MILK PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Shivank Diddi, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
ORDER
% 16.05.2023
1. Mr. Shivank Diddi, learned counsel, enters appearance on behalf of respondent, and states that respondent does not wish to file a reply to the petition.
2. However, Mr. Diddi raises an objection that the petitioner has not invoked the arbitration clauses in the franchise agreements dated 10.07.2017 and 15.07.2017 in accordance with law. For this purpose, Mr. Diddi points out that the arbitration clause was originally invoked by respondent vide a letter dated 12.06.2019, to which the petitioner responded on 19.06.2019, disputing the respondent's entitlement to appoint the arbitrator unilaterally. The learned Arbitrator appointed by the respondent nevertheless entered into the reference in respect of 14 franchise agreeements, including the two which are in issue in the present ARB.P. 337/2023 Page 1 of 2 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/09/2023 at 10:44:09 case. It appears that there was some correspondence thereafter, during the course of which the said proceedings were continued in respect of 12 franchise agreements, excluding the two which are in issue in the present case. The mandate of the learned Arbitrator was ultimately terminated at the instance of the petitioner vide a judgment of this Court dated 13.05.2022, in O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 31/2021, and a new Arbitrator was appointed. Although the petitioner filed counter claims therein in respect of 14 franchise agreements, the learned Arbitrator has, by an order dated 02.12.2022, recorded that the reference was only with regard to 12 franchise agreements, and the counter claims of the petitioner herein in respect of the two agreements in question in this petition were, therefore, withdrawn.
3. In these circumstances, Mr. Diddi suggests that there is neither any invocation of arbitration by the respondent, nor any ongoing arbitration at the instance of respondent, in which the petitioner can assert its counter claims.
4. Mr. Gaurav Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, seeks an opportunity to address on this aspect.
5. List on 11.08.2023.
PRATEEK JALAN, J MAY 16, 2023 'vp'/ ARB.P. 337/2023 Page 2 of 2 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/09/2023 at 10:44:09