Delhi High Court - Orders
Vinay Bareja & Anr vs Everlong Brands Pvt. Ltd on 24 April, 2024
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~39
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ARB.P. 512/2024 and I.A. 8948/2024
VINAY BAREJA & ANR. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Atul Kumar & Mr. Jayant Malik,
Advs. (M:8816811540)
versus
EVERLONG BRANDS PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
ORDER
% 24.04.2024
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. I.A. 8948/2024 (for exemption)
2. This is an application seeking exemption from filing originals/certified/cleared/typed or translated copies of documents, left side margins, electronic documents, etc. Original documents shall be produced/filed at the time of Admission/Denial, if sought, strictly as per the DHC (Original Side) Rules, 2018.
3. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
4. Accordingly, the applications are disposed of.
ARB.P. 512/20245. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioners-Mr. Vinay Bareja and Ms. Kavita Baraja under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an arbitrator in terms of the Business Transfer Agreement dated 17th November, 2021 (hereinafter, 'Agreement').
6. It is stated that as per the Agreement, payments to the tune of Rs. 2.85 Crores were to be made by the Respondent to the Petitioners. The case of the 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 27/04/2024 at 04:49:01 Petitioners is that certain initial amounts i.e., Rs 1.25 Crores and further, Rs. 40 Lakhs were paid by the Respondent to the Petitioners. However, an amount of Rs. 60 Lakhs which was to be paid by the Respondent to the Petitioners on or before 31st December, 2023 has not been paid.
7. The Petitioners further state that due to the non-payment of the said dues on behalf of the Respondent, the Petitioners issued a legal notice on 11th January, 2024 with a further notice on 5th February, 2024. In the notice dated 5th February, 2024, the Petitioners invoked the arbitration clause in terms of Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and suggested three arbitrators. However, in reply to the said notice, dated 16th February, 2024, the Respondent denies the liability and states as under:
"h. Our Client denies and objects to the remaining contents of the Second Legal Notice. Our Client further objects to the appointment of any of the three arbitrators suggested by your good office. Our Client instructs us to inform you that in case an arbitrator has to be appointed, it has to be done so under due course by an appropriate court order"
8. A perusal of the arbitration clause 9 of the Agreement would show that the venue for Arbitration is at Bombay or Delhi. The Petitioner is located in Delhi.
9. Under these circumstances, issue notice to the Respondent.
10. The notice shall also be served at the ld. Counsel's email address [email protected] by the Registry in addition to the email address and mobile number mentioned in the memo of parties.
11. List on 12th July, 2024.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
APRIL 24, 2024/dj/rks 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 27/04/2024 at 04:49:01