Delhi High Court - Orders
Sis Cash Services (Private) Limited vs Bls E-Solutions Private Limited on 10 September, 2021
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~22
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ARB.P. 417/2020
SIS CASH SERVICES (PRIVATE) LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Anupam Kishore Sinha,
Advocate.
versus
BLS E-SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED . ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Tanmaya Mehta, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 10.09.2021
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 11(4)(a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short 'the Act') seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for adjudication of disputes that have arisen out of and in relation to the Agreement dated 3rd October, 2017 (signed on 18th May, 2018) executed between the parties. The arbitration clause is contained in the Agreement which reads as under:
"All disputes between the parties hereto pertaining to or arising out of this agreement shall be tried to be settled by the parties amicably and failing which matter will be referred to Arbitration. The Arbitration proceedings shall be governed and conducted in accordance with Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as amended from time to time and shall be subjected to exclusive jurisdiction of courts at New Delhi"
2. Mr. Tanmaya Mehta, counsel for the Respondent on instructions states that he has no objection to the appointment of the Arbitrator, as existence of the arbitration agreement is not in dispute. However, at the same time he also submits that in the ensuing arbitration proceedings, the presence of BLS Kendras Pvt. Ltd. is necessary for effective and complete adjudication of ARB.P. 417/2020 Page 1 of 3 disputes between the parties. He prays that while allowing the petition, and referring the disputes to arbitration, Court may clarify that allowing of the petition will not in any way prejudice the rights and remedies of BLS Kendras Pvt. Ltd.
3. Counsel for the Petitioner controverts the submissions made by Mr. Mehta qua the requirement of BLS Kendras Pvt. Ltd being a necessary party to the arbitration proceedings. He submits that the disputes qua BLS Kendras Pvt. Ltd. are not arbitrable under the Agreement, which is the subject matter of present proceedings.
4. The existence of the arbitration agreement is not in dispute. The agreement is ex-facie executed between the parties. The petition therefore deserves to be allowed. Mr. Nakul Dewan, Senior Advocate (Contact No. +919891325005) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate disputes that have arisen between the parties, in respect of the Agreement dated 3rd October, 2017 (signed on 18th May, 2018). It is made clear that this order will not prejudice the rights and remedies of BLS Kendras Pvt. Ltd, as are available under law.
5. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Arbitrator as and when notified. This is subject to the Arbitrator making the necessary disclosure under Section 12(1) of the Act and not being ineligible under Section 12(5) of the Act.
6. The learned Arbitrator will be paid their fee in terms of the provisions of the Fourth Schedule appended to the Act.
7. It is clarified that the Court has not examined any of the claims of the parties and all rights and contentions on merits are left open. Both the parties shall be free to raise their claims/counter claims before the learned ARB.P. 417/2020 Page 2 of 3 Arbitrator in accordance with law.
8. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of.
SANJEEV NARULA, J SEPTEMBER 10, 2021 v ARB.P. 417/2020 Page 3 of 3