Delhi High Court - Orders
Hindustan Media Ventures Ltd vs M/S Pmk Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd And Ors on 16 December, 2022
Author: Navin Chawla
Bench: Navin Chawla
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ARB.P. 1228/2022
HINDUSTAN MEDIA VENTURES LTD. ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms.Preeti Goel, Adv.
versus
M/S PMK ECOMMERCE PVT. LTD AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
ORDER
% 16.12.2022
1. This petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by the petitioner seeking appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes that have arisen between the parties in relation to the Investment Agreement dated 10.03.2021 executed between the parties.
2. The Arbitration Agreement is contained in Clause 14.12 of the Investment Agreement, and is reproduced herein below:
"14.12 Any dispute or difference arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, which cannot be amicably settled within 30(Thirty) days, shall be referred at the request in writing of the Party to binding arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as amended, by a sole arbitrator appointed in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as amended. The language of arbitration shall be English and the venue and seat of arbitration shall be New Delhi. Each Party to the arbitration shall bear and pay its own costs and expenses in connection with the arbitration proceedings unless the arbitrators Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:17.12.2022 14:07:41 direct otherwise. The award of the arbitral tribunal shall be final and conclusive and binding upon the Parties. When any dispute or difference is referred to arbitration, except for the matters under dispute, the Parties shall continue to exercise their remaining respective rights and fulfill their remaining respective obligations under this Agreement."
3. Disputes having arisen between the parties, the petitioner invoked the Arbitration Agreement vide notice dated 20.08.2022, proposing the names of the Arbitrators.
4. In response to the legal notice, an e-mail dated 24.08.2022 was received by the petitioner from one Mr. Pradeep Khandekar, affirming the agreement, however, stating that either the arbitration be held at Mumbai or he shall join such arbitration proceedings through video conferencing.
5. The petitioner thereafter made an attempt to contact Mr. Pradeep Khandekar, however, the same did not fructify into a settlement.
6. Notice of this petition was issued to the respondents vide order dated 09.11.2022.
7. The petitioner has filed an affidavit of service claiming that the respondents have been duly served with the notice issued by this Court.
8. None has appeared for the respondent nor any reply to the petition has been filed.
9. As the existence of the Arbitration Agreement and the due invocation thereof by the petitioner remains undisputed by the respondents, I see Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:17.12.2022 14:07:41 no impediment in appointing a Sole Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes that have arisen between the parties in relation to the Investment Agreement dated 10.03.2021.
10. I accordingly, appoint Hon'ble Mr. Justice G.S.Sistani, (Retired Judge of this Court), Bungalow no. M-23, Jangpura Extension, New Delhi- 110014, Mob. No. 9871300034, as a Sole Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes between the parties.
11. The Sole Arbitrator shall give the disclosure in terms of Sections 12 of the Act before proceeding with the reference.
12. The fee of the Sole Arbitrator shall be in accordance with Fourth Schedule of the Act.
13. The petition is allowed in the above terms.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J DECEMBER 16, 2022 RN/am Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:17.12.2022 14:07:41