Delhi High Court - Orders
Noida Toll Bridge Company Limited vs Nidhi Sharma & Anr on 16 October, 2023
Author: Yogesh Khanna
Bench: Yogesh Khanna
$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ARB. A. (COMM.) 8/2023 I.A. 6153/2023 I.A. 14860/2023
NOIDA TOLL BRIDGE COMPANY LIMITED
..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Jayant Mehta, Sr. Advocate with
Mr.Raunak Dhillon, Ms.Isha Malik,
Mr.Nihaad Dewan, Mr.Anchit Jasuja
and Ms.Nikita Sethi, Advocates.
versus
NIDHI SHARMA & ANR.
..... Respondent
Through: Mr.J.Sai Deepak, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA
ORDER
% 16.10.2023
1. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has argued the condition of the impugned order dated 03.03.2023 so as to direct the petitioner to deposit FDR of Rs.5.00 crore within four weeks is against law viz. against the spirit of Section 28(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act; and secondly beyond the prayer made in the application under Section 17 of the Act; and lastly it is against the provisions of Order 38 Rule 5 CPC. It is argued such an order cannot be passed merely at the asking of the applicant and without any application in this regard. It is alleged twin conditions of Order 38 Rule 5 need to be satisfied prior to passing of such order, as are elaborated in Raman Tech. & Process Engineering Co. and Anr. Vs. Solanki Traders (2008) 2 SCC 302 and also in Natrip Implementation society V. IVRCL Ltd. 2016 SCC Online Del 5023.
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 18/10/2023 at 22:00:06
2. It is further submitted the petitioner has deposits worth Rs.41.8 crores as per the document listed at page No.874 (document 36) and hence there was no occasion for the learned arbitrator to pass such a direction, more specifically, in the absence of a prayer made in application under Section 17 by the respondent herein and without adhereing to the principles laid down under Order 38 rule 5 CPC.
3. It is further the submission of learned senior counsel for the petitioner the termination was done per Clause 10.4 of the Licence Agreement dated 23.08.2018. The said Clause is as under :
"10.4 Termination by LICENSOR without cause:
Notwithstanding anything contained in this Agreement, the LICENSOR shall have the right to termination this Agreement during the License Term after giving a written notice of three (3) months to the LICENSEE without assigning any reason whatsoever and without incurring any obligation or liability as a result of such termination"
4. List for arguments on behalf of the respondent on 28.11.2023.
5. Interim order to continue.
YOGESH KHANNA, J.
OCTOBER 16, 2023 VLD 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 18/10/2023 at 22:00:06