Angul Energy Limited v. Vistrat Real Estate Private Limited & ORS.

$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 634/2024 I.A. 34971/2024 I.A. 42588/2024 I.A. 42589/2024 ANGUL ENERGY LIMITED .....Plaintiff Through:

Mr. Sumit Bansal, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. Arvind Thapliyal, Mr.

Siddharth Pandey, Mr.

Udaibir Kochar, Mr. Aditya Bakshi, Mr.

Pushkar Khanna, Advocates.

versus VISTRAT REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.

.....Defendant Through:

Ms.

Ranjana Roy Gawai, Ms.

Vasudha Sen, Mr. Vineet Wadhwa, Mr. Prateek Gupta, Advocates for D1 & 4.

Mr. Anubhav Singh, Mr. Aman Singh, Mr. Nitin Kumar, Ms. Maria Mary, Advocates for D-5.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

O R D E R

% 10.02.2025 I.A. 43088/2024 (under Order XXII Rule 10 of CPC) 1.

This application has been filed for substitution of the plaintiff (Angul Energy Ltd.) by the applicant (Tata Steel Ltd.), in view of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), which was initiated against the erstwhile Bhushan Energy Ltd. (BEL) and culminated in approval of the resolution plan submitted by Tata Steel Ltd.

2.

The name of Bhushan Energy Ltd. (BEL) had earlier been changed to The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Angul Energy Ltd. considering that Tata Steel Ltd. had taken over the plaintiff company, the said substitution is allowed.

3.

Application is disposed of with the above directions. CS(COMM) 634/2024 1.

Summons have not been issued in this matter.

2.

Senior Counsel for the plaintiff states that, without prejudice to their objection that the Arbitration Clause in the Lease Agreement does not cover the disputes that arose in the Memorandum of Security Deposit, basis which the suit was filed for recovery of about approximately Rs.20 Crores plus interest, they are agreeable to the matter being referred to the Arbitration by this Court under Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908 ("CPC"). 3.

Counsel for defendant had already filed an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act,1996 ("A&C Act") and, therefore, per se do not have objection that the disputes be referred to Arbitration. 4.

Considering the above submission, the Court, therefore, without adverting to the merits of the application under Section 8 of the A & C Act, refers the matter to Arbitration in exercise of the powers of this Court under Section 89 CPC, based on the consensus arrived at between the parties. Needless to state, the plaintiff shall not object to the arbitrability of the issue before the Arbitrator, considering the above. 5.

Justice Rajiv Shakdher, (Retd.) (Mobile No. 9717495004) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator. The fee of the Sole Arbitrator shall be as per the Fourth Schedule of the A&C Act.

6.

All issues inter se the parties, may be placed before the Arbitrator, in accordance with law.

7.

In view of the directions passed under Section 89 of CPC, the Court fee be refunded to the plaintiff. The Registry is directed accordingly. 8.

Petition is disposed of with all pending applications, if any. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

9.

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court. ANISH DAYAL, J FEBRUARY 10, 2025/ak/tk The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.