← Library
High Court of DelhiO.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.)/369/2025

M/S Dream Merchant Realtors Pvt Ltd v. M/S Amd Estates Developers Pvt Ltd & ANR.

2025-05-07Hon'Ble Ms. Justice Jyoti Singh3 pages

$~72 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + M/S DREAM MERCHANT REALTORS PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Kartik Nagarkatti, Advocate.

versus M/S AMD ESTATES DEVELOPERS PVT LTD & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Vidit Gupta, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

O R D E R

% 07.05.2025 I.A. 11397/2025 (Exemption) 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

Application stands disposed of.

3.

This petition is preferred on behalf of the Petitioner under Section 29A (4) and (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('1996 Act') seeking extension of the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal by a period of six months.

4.

Disputes having arisen between the parties in relation to Development/Collaboration Agreement dated 05.05.2014 for developing a Township comprising of residential plots/group housing plots/IT parks/commercial plots and complex/EWS, public and health utilities on Respondents' land admeasuring 264 Kanal 11 Marla i.e., about 33.06875 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

acres, situated at Village Mouja Majra Gurdas, Tehsil and District Rewari, Haryana, Respondents filed a petition under Section 9 of 1996 Act, being O.M.P. (I)(COMM.) 226/2019 for restraining the Petitioner from causing any interference in use, enjoyment or transfer of the land. By order dated 22.07.2019, Court directed the parties to maintain status quo in respect of land until further orders. However, the petition was withdrawn by Respondents on 11.01.2022.

5.

It is stated that thereafter Petitioner filed a petition under Section 9 of 1996 Act being O.M.P.(I)(COMM.) 44/2022, which was allowed on 09.02.2022, continuing interim order dated 11.01.2022 passed in the earlier petition and directing the Arbitral Tribunal to be constituted, to treat the petition as an application under Section 17 of 1996 Act. Disputes were referred to Delhi International Arbitration Centre ('DIAC') and a Sole Arbitrator was appointed. It is stated in the petition that after the mandate was extended by this Court from time to time, proceedings have progressed considerably before the Sole Arbitrator and are at the stage of final arguments, for which dates of 16.05.2025 and 19.05.2025 have been fixed by the learned Arbitrator.

6.

Issue notice.

7.

Mr. Vidit Gupta, learned counsel for the Respondents accepts notice and on instructions, submits that the Respondents have no objection to the extension of mandate of the learned Arbitrator. 8.

Accordingly, with the consent of the parties and considering that the arbitral proceedings are at the stage of final arguments, mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal is extended by a period of six months from 07.05.2025 and since the mandate has expired on 03.04.2025, period between 04.04.2025 to The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

06.05.2025 is regularised.

9.

Petition is allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms JYOTI SINGH, J MAY 7, 2025 S.Sharma The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.