Delhi High Court - Orders
Union Of India vs Arsh Constructions on 19 July, 2024
Author: C. Hari Shankar
Bench: C. Hari Shankar
$~63/65
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ O.M.P. (COMM) 15/2023
UNION OF INDIA .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, CGSC
with Ms. Pinky Pawar and Mr. Aakash
Pathak, Advs.
versus
ARSH CONSTRUCTIONS .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Sahil Garg, Mr. Mithil
Malhotra Mr. Abhinav Jain and Ms.
Samiksha Jain, Advs.
+ OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 85/2024
M/S ARSH CONSTRUCTIONS ....Decree Holder
Through: Mr. Sahil Garg, Mr. Mithil
Malhotra Mr. Abhinav Jain and Ms.
Samiksha Jain, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA .....Judgement Debtor
Through: Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, CGSC
with Ms. Pinky Pawar and Mr. Aakash
Pathak, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
ORDER
% 19.07.2024
1. This Court, in its order dated 21 February 2024, observed that an issue of territorial jurisdiction arises in the present case. Though the law regarding territorial jurisdiction is somewhat settled, the facts of the present case give rise to some complexity.
O.M.P. (COMM) 15/2023 & OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 85/2024 Page 1 of 4This 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 23/07/2024 at 01:52:20
2. The General Conditions of Contract1 which govern the parties, contains the following covenants with respect to the place of arbitration and the venue of arbitration:
"The place of arbitration shall be as mentioned in Schedule F. In case there is no mention of place of arbitration, the arbitral tribunal shall determine the place of arbitration.
The venue of the arbitration shall be such place as may be fixed by the Arbitral Tribunal in consultation with both the parties. Failing any such agreement, then the Arbitral Tribunal shall decide the venue."
3. Schedule F to the GCC does not specify any place of arbitration.
4. The arbitral proceedings were set in place by order dated 4 June 2020, passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.
5. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana appointed a retired Judge of that Court as a sole arbitrator. The order further proceeded to state thus:
"For the sake of the convenience of the parties, as also of the Arbitrator, the venue of the Arbitration shall be at Delhi Arbitration Centre, Delhi or at any other place convenient to all concerned."
6. The award rendered by the learned Arbitrator has come to be challenged by the petitioner before this Court.
7. The respondent raises a preliminary objection of territorial jurisdiction.
1"GCC" hereinafter O.M.P. (COMM) 15/2023 & OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 85/2024 Page 2 of 4 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 23/07/2024 at 01:52:20
8. During the course of proceedings, the learned Arbitral Tribunal recorded, on 8 August 2022, thus:
"Seat of Arbitration
4. It has gone undisputed between the parties that Gurgaon is the seat of arbitration with the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana having supervisory jurisdiction over these arbitral proceedings.""
9. Though Ms. Dwivedi sought to contend that there was no consent by her client before the learned Arbitral Tribunal, at any point of time, that the seat of arbitration was Gurgaon, or that the supervisory jurisdiction over the award was only that of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, no such specific ground has been taken in the present Section 34 petition.
10. This is an aspect which Ms. Dwivedi would have to deal with during arguments.
11. Mr. Garg, learned Counsel for the respondent has relied on Section 20(2)2 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 along with the judgment of the Supreme Court in BBR (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. S. P. Singla Construction Pvt. Ltd.3 and the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in DTDC v. Sunehari Bagh Construction Pvt. Ltd4.
2 20. Place of arbitration. -
(1) The parties are free to agree on the place of arbitration. (2) Failing any agreement referred to in sub-section (1), the place of arbitration shall be determined by the arbitral tribunal having regard to the circumstances of the case, including the convenience of the parties.
3 2023 (1) SCC 693 O.M.P. (COMM) 15/2023 & OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 85/2024 Page 3 of 4 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 23/07/2024 at 01:52:20
12. Ms. Dwivedi relies, on the other hand, on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Inox Renewables Ltd. v. Jayesh Electricals Ltd5. and the judgments of the Division Bench and Single Judges of High Court of Bombay in Gurumahima Heights Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Admirecon Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.6 and Honey Bee Multitrading Pvt. Ltd. v. Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd7 respectively.
13. The issue being somewhat involved, re-notify on 25 July 2024 for further hearing.
C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
JULY 19, 2024 dsn Click here to check corrigendum, if any 4 2024 SCC OnLine Del 378 5 (2023) 3 SCC 733 6 2023 SCC OnLine Bo 2703 7 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 652 O.M.P. (COMM) 15/2023 & OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 85/2024 Page 4 of 4 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 23/07/2024 at 01:52:21