Himanshu Arora v. M/S Neo Developers Pvt. Ltd.

$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 1516/2025 HIMANSHU ARORA .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Asim Naeem and Ms. Cherry Gupta Ania, Advs. (Through VC) versus M/S NEO DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.

.....Respondent Through:

Mr. Jitender Chaudhary, Ms. Shilpa Chohan and Mr. Mohit, Avds.

M: 9810494638 Email: juris_consult@rediffmail.com

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

O R D E R

% 26.02.2026 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Arbitration Act"), seeking appointment of an Sole Arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties arising out of the th Memorandum of Understanding ("MoU") dated 15 October, 2016.

th 2.

This Court notes that on the last date of hearing, i.e., 17 February, 2026, the following was recorded by this Court: th December, 2025 has been rendered by the Division Bench in FAO (COMM) 204/2025, as per which, even if a dispute is referred to the Real Estate Regulatory Authority ("RERA"), the matter can be referred to arbitration, as the two remedies are distinct and separate.

2. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that there is no impediment in appointment of an Arbitrator in the present batch of cases.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent seeks an accommodation for today, on the ground that the main counsel is not available.

4. Accordingly, at request, re-notify on 26th "1. Judgment dated 24 February, 2026."

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

3.

In pursuance to the judgement dated 24th December, 2025 passed by the Division Bench in FAO (COMM) 204/2025, the present matter is taken up by this Court, as the parties herein have not approached the Real Estate Regulatory Authority ("RERA"), and seek their remedies under the arbitration mechanism.

4.

As per the facts before this Court, the respondent has developed a commercial complex, i.e., "NEO Square", on the land situated at Sector109, Dwarka Expressway, Gurgaon, Haryana, wherein the petitioner had th Floor, Food booked a space admeasuring 300 sq. ft. (27.87091 sq. mt.) at 5 Court, with Priority No. 522, which was allotted to the petitioner, and the parties entered into the MoU dated 15th October, 2016.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that disputes arose between the parties as despite the petitioner paying the entire sale consideration, the respondent has failed to complete the project in the stipulated period of 36 months and handover the possession of the said property. 6.

Subsequently, the petitioner issued the Legal Notice dated 23rd May, 2025 to the respondent, thereby, invoking the arbitration clause, i.e., Clause 17 of the MoU dated 15th October, 2016, under Section 21 of the Arbitration Act.

7.

It is submitted that no response has been made by the respondent to the said Legal Notice, hence the present petition came to be filed. 8.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the MoU dated 15th October, 2016 between the parties, wherein, the Arbitration Clause as enumerated in the MoU, is reproduced as under:

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

"xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx"

9.

At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that he does not deny the arbitration clause, i.e., Clause 17 of the MoU dated 15th October, 2016. However, he submits that there is no Builder-Buyer Agreement in the present case that has been filed or relied upon. 10.

Perusal of the aforesaid arbitration clause clearly shows that there is a valid Arbitration Agreement between the parties, which stipulates reference of disputes between the parties to Sole Arbitrator, with venue of arbitration proceedings being New Delhi.

11.

This Court takes note of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner has a claim of approximately Rs. 21.06 Lacs against the respondent.

12.

Accordingly, this Court is satisfied that there are disputes between the parties and there is a valid arbitration clause, and accordingly the disputes are to be adjudicated by way of referring the parties to arbitral proceedings. 13.

Accordingly, the following directions are issued: i.

Ms.

Sapna Nirwan, Advocate, (Mobile No.:

9999450823;

8882695524, is appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

ii.

The remuneration of the Arbitrator shall be in terms of Schedule IV of the Arbitration Act.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

iii.

The Arbitrator is requested to furnish a declaration in terms of Section 12 of the Act prior to entering into the reference. In the event there is any impediment to the Arbitrator's appointment on that count, the parties are given liberty to file an appropriate application before this Court. iv.

It shall be open to the respondent to raise counter-claims, if any, in arbitration proceedings.

v.

It is made clear that all the rights and contentions of the parties, including, the arbitrability of any of the claims and/or counter-claims, any other preliminary objection, as well as claims on merits of the dispute of either of the parties, are left open for adjudication by the learned Arbitrator. vi.

The parties shall approach the Arbitrator within two (2) weeks from today.

14.

Needless to state, nothing in this order shall be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case. 15.

The present petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 16.

The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator, for information and compliance.

MINI PUSHKARNA, J FEBRUARY 26, 2026/KR The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.