Delhi High Court - Orders
Mtandt Rentals Limited vs M/S. Nirmal Lifestyle Ltd on 8 July, 2022
Author: V. Kameswar Rao
Bench: V. Kameswar Rao
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ARB.P. 117/2022
MTANDT RENTALS LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Shashwat Tripathi and
Ms. Ridhima Verma, Advs.
versus
M/S. NIRMAL LIFESTYLE LTD. ..... Respondent
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
ORDER
% 08.07.2022
1. On the last date of hearing, this Court had issued notice to the respondent returnable for today.
2. An affidavit of service has been filed by the counsel for the petitioner wherein in paragraph nos. 2 to 5, the following has been stated:
"2. I further state that this Hon‟ble Court, by way of order dated 21.04.2022 was please to issue Notice to the Respondent was to be served through all modes. That by way of the present Affidavit, it is submitted that I have served the copy of the Notice dated 25.04.2022 alongwith the Petition and the Annexures to the Respondent by Speed Post and by Courier in terms of order dated 21.04.2022.
3. That a copy of the Postal Receipt for Speed Post sent as on 07.05.2022 along with the Tracing Report confirming status of the same as „delivered‟ on 09.05.2022 is annexed herewith as Annexure A. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ASHEESH KUMAR YADAV Signing Date:13.07.2022 11:13:13
4. That a copy of the Postal Receipt for Courier sent as on 07.05.2022 alongwith the Tracking Report confirming status of the same as „delivered‟ as 13.05.2022 is annexed herewith as Annexure B.
5. I state, the Deponent has duly served the order dated 21.04.2022 passed by Hon‟ble Court along with complete set of the Petition and annexures and the same has been duly delivered to the Respondent. Therefore, it is humbly stated that the Deponent has duly complied with the order dated 21.04.2022."
3. Despite service there is no appearance for the respondent.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. He states, there was a contractual relationship between the parties with regard to the supply and installation of hoists on rental basis at the sites of the real estate projects being developed by the respondent as per work order issued to the respondent for that purpose.
5. According to him, from time to time, invoices have been raised on the respondent for payment of the rental charges for supply and installation of hoists. In this regard, he states, an amount of ₹9,47,000/- has been paid against the total cumulative invoices being ₹31,29,163. According to him, a further amount of ₹6 Lac was tendered by way of cheque, which got dishonoured. As of today an amount of ₹21,82,163/-is due and payable by the respondent.
6. My attention has been drawn to the Arbitration Clause in the work order, which reads as under:
"ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION All disputes or differences arising between the Company and the Contractor, or his legal representatives or successors under and in respect of the contract including any claim by one against the other Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ASHEESH KUMAR YADAV Signing Date:13.07.2022 11:13:13 for money or otherwise or on the question of interpretation or meaning of any provision of the contract shall be referred to Arbitration of Arbitrators one to be appointed by each party to the dispute or difference and the Arbitration will be governed by the Arbitration Act for the time being in force."
7. He concedes to the fact that the above arbitration clause does not refer to the seat of arbitration. He also states, the invoices which have been issued to the respondent stipulates the seat of arbitration to be at Delhi and shall be held under the aegis of Delhi International Arbitration Centre ('DIAC', for short). According to him, the said invoices have been received and some paid by the respondent. At no point of time respondent has contested the said position in the invoices.
8. I may at this stage reproduce the stipulation in the invoices as under:
"All the disputes and differences between the parties shall be settled under the Rules of Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DAC) by sole arbitrator appointed in accordance with the Rules of DAC. The place of arbitration shall be Delhi International Arbitration Centre at Delhi and the language of arbitration shall be English. Party at fault shall be liable to pay all the costs, inclusive of counsel's fee, relating to all the legal and arbitration proceedings."
9. Noting the said submission and noting the position of law in terms of the judgments in the cases of Swastik Pipe Ltd. v. Shri Ram Autotech Pvt. Ltd., Arb. P. 241/2021; Scholar Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s. Khanna Traders, 2013 (3) Arb. LR 105 (Delhi); MTNL v. Carana Bank, Civil Appeal Nos. 6202-6205/2019 and Lewis W. Fernandes v. Jivatlal Partapashi & Ors. AIR 1947 Bom 65 this Court is satisfied that the arbitration clause in the invoice shall bind the parties and this Court has the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ASHEESH KUMAR YADAV Signing Date:13.07.2022 11:13:13 jurisdiction to entertain the present petition and appoint an Arbitrator under the aegis of the DIAC. Accordingly, DIAC shall appoint an Arbitrator from its panel to adjudicate the disputes between the parties through claims and counter-claims, if any.
10. The terms of the appointment of the learned Arbitrator shall be regulated under the Rules of DIAC.
11. Let a copy of this order be sent to Coordinator, DIAC for information.
12. Petition stands disposed of.
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.
JULY 8, 2022/jg Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ASHEESH KUMAR YADAV Signing Date:13.07.2022 11:13:13