Equinox Hospitality Pvt Ltd v. Satyadeo Hospitality Pvt Ltd

$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 1201/2025 EQUINOX HOSPITALITY PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Sonal Anand, Ms. Surbhi Singh, Advs.

versus SATYADEO HOSPITALITY PVT LTD .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Nitish Sharma, Ms. Sajal Manchanda, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

% 13.10.2025 1.

This is a petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for adjudication of disputes between the parties.

2.

The brief facts are the respondent executed a Lease Deed dated 14.08.2019 with the petitioner vide which the petitioner took on lease the Royal Tulip Kufri, Hotel for a period of 8 years and 9 months to run and manage the same.

3.

The said Lease Deed contains an arbitration clause being Clause No. 18, which reads as under:- "18. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 18.1 Any dispute in respect of all or any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be resolved by arbitration in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as amended from time to time. The number of arbitrators shall be 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/10/2025 at 11:50:15

(three), or whom the Lessee and the Lessor shall appoint one arbitrator each. The 2 (two) arbitrators so appointed shall appoint the 3rd (third) arbitrator. The arbitral award shall be final and binding on the Parties. The place of arbitration shall be New Delhi and the language used shall be English." 4.

Since disputes arose between the parties, the petitioner invoked arbitration vide legal notice dated 07.03.2025 and thereafter, filed the present petition.

5.

Ms. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner will serve a fresh notice appointing the petitioner's nominee Arbitrator. 6.

Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent states that the arbitration clause contemplates an Arbitral Tribunal of 3 members and the respondent has already appointed its nominee Arbitrator. 7.

Both the nominee Arbitrators so appointed by the parties, shall appoint the Presiding Arbitrator. In case there is no consensus reached upon regarding the appointment of the Presiding Arbitrator, the petitioner will be at liberty to file a fresh petition for appointment of the Presiding Arbitrator. 8.

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. JASMEET SINGH, J OCTOBER 13, 2025/AS The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/10/2025 at 11:50:15