Case No.
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/
Acts & Sections
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 §11
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 §29
Headnote
AI-drafted · Reviewed and approved
The petitioners filed petitions under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes arising out of a Third Collaboration Agreement dated 14.10.2010 executed between the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.1 (M/s Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd.) in respect of land admeasuring 28 Kanal, 12 Marla situated in revenue estate of village Badshahpur, Sector 67, Gurgaon. Pursuant to the said agreement, Plot Buyer Agreements were executed on 23.12.2010 allotting Plot Nos. C-1018 and C-1019, Esencia, Sector-67, Gurugram to the petitioner no.1, but neither possession was handed over nor sale deeds executed. Respondents nos. 1 and 2 had already consented to constitution of an arbitral tribunal vide order dated 18.09.2023.
Key issues arose regarding whether respondents nos. 3 to 5 — who had acquired the disputed plots through subsequent sale deeds dated 10.12.2018 — were bound by the arbitration clause contained in the Third Collaboration Agreement. The petitioners contended that since the said respondents derived their purported title through respondent nos. 1 and 2, and the agreement defined 'developer' to include assignees, they were bound by the arbitration clause either as assignees or by implied consent. Reliance was placed on Rajesh Gupta v. Mohit Lata Sunda and Shapoorji Pallonji and Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Rattan India Power Ltd.
The Court was called upon to examine the applicability of the arbitration clause to non-signatory third-party purchasers of the subject plots and the scope of the Court's jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in adjudicating such disputes involving multiple parties and connected agreements.
Catchwords:
Arbitration · appointment of arbitrator · Section 11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act · collaboration agreement · non-signatory parties · assignees · plot buyer agreement · real estate dispute · implied consent to arbitration · third-party purchasers · arbitration clause · developer · land development
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
Suresh Kumar 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 Gr
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.