LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/badrinath-kakkar-anr-vs-m-s-ansal-properties-and-infrastructure-limited-anr-20241029/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Civil

Badrinath Kakkar & Anr. vs M/S Ansal Properties And Infrastructure Limited & Anr.

Court
Delhi High Court
Date
29 October 2024
Case No.
ARB.P. 721/2022, ARB.P. 722/2022, O.M.P.(I)(COMM.) 14/2022, OMP(I)(COMM) 15/2022
Result
Disposed
Bench
Sachin Datta J.
Acts & Sections
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 §11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 §29
Also reported in
This judgment disposed of connected matters. The same reasons were delivered in the following 2 cases.
Suresh Kumar Kakkar & Anr. vs M/S Ansal Properties And Infrastructure Limited & Anr.
ARB.P. 721/2022, O.M.P.(I)(COMM.) 14/2022, CRL.M.A. 23067/2022, I.A. 18367/2022, I.A. 9831/2023, ARB.P. 722/2022, OMP(I)(COMM) 15/2022 & IA Nos. 5424/
Badrinath Kakkar & Anr. vs M/S Ansal Properties And Infrastructure Limited & Anr.
ARB.P. 721/2022, ARB.P. 722/2022, O.M.P.(I)(COMM.) 14/2022, OMP(I)(COMM) 15/2022
Headnote AI-drafted · Reviewed and approved
The petitioners, landowners who had entered into a Third Collaboration Agreement dated 14.10.2010 with M/S Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Limited for development of land in Sector 67, Gurgaon, filed petitions under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator after disputes arose concerning non-delivery of possession of allotted plots and execution of sale deeds. The respondent developer had, without the petitioners' knowledge, sold the allotted plots (C-1018 and C-1019) to third parties via sale deeds dated 10.12.2018, thereby necessitating the impleadment of subsequent purchasers as respondents.

The key legal issue considered was whether third-party purchasers/assignees (respondents 3 to 5), who were not original signatories to the Collaboration Agreement containing the arbitration clause, could nonetheless be bound by the arbitration clause, particularly given that the agreement defined 'developer' to include assignees and the third parties derived their title through the original developer. The petitioners argued, relying on Rajesh Gupta v. Mohit Lata Sunda and Shapoorji Pallonji and Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Rattan India Power Ltd., that such parties had impliedly consented to and were bound by the arbitration agreement.

The court examined the scope of the arbitration clause under the Third Collaboration Agreement and the question of whether non-signatories claiming through a signatory party could be subjected to arbitration. The respondents 1 and 2 had already consented to arbitration by order dated 18.09.2023, and the court considered the submissions on extension of the arbitration clause to subsequent transferees and assignees who derived benefits under the agreement.
Catchwords: Arbitration · appointment of arbitrator · Section 11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act · collaboration agreement · non-signatory parties · assignees · subsequent purchasers · real estate development · Gurgaon · plot allotment · sale deed · implied consent to arbitration

Headnote © LegalFirms.in. Section 52(1)(q)(iv) of the Copyright Act, 1957 allows a court's judgment to be reproduced unless the court has prohibited it.

Full Judgment Text

[Cites 37, Cited by 0] Delhi High Court Badrinath Kakkar & Anr. vs M/S Ansal Properties And ... on 29 October, 2024 Author: Sachin Datta Bench: Sachin Datta $~J-1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on: 29.10.2024 + ARB.P. 721/2022 SURESH KUMAR KAKKAR & ANR ..... Petitioners Through: Ms. Akanksha Kaul, Mr. Harsh Sethi and Mr. Anant, Advocates. versus M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ravi Sikri, Sr. Adv. alongwith Mr. Sachin Midha, Mr. Deepank Yadav, Mr. Aditya Vikram Bajpai and Ms. Kanak Grove
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All Delhi HC judgments →
⚖ LegalFirms.in Directory
Find a verified advocate for this matter
Dealing with a similar case? Connect with a verified advocate on LegalFirms.in.
Find an Advocate →