M/S.Dneg India Media Services Limited, (Formerly Double Negative India Private Ltd) v. M/S.Rattha Holding Company Private Limited,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE: 22.07.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR O.A.Nos.262 & 263 of 2020 M/s.DNEG India Media Services Limited, (formerly Double Negative India Private Limited), 1st & 2nd Floor, Block - A, Campus Tex Meadows, No.51, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Sholinganallur, Chennai - 600 119.
...Applicant .. Vs ..
M/s.Rattha Holding Company Private Limited, 6th Floor, Tower 'C', Tek Meadows, No.51, Rajiv Ganghi Salai, Sholinganallur, Chennai - 600 119.
... Respondent Prayer: Applications filed for interim injunctions restraining the respondent, its men, agents, and/or any person acting through under or on the instructions of the respondent from interfering with the applicants possession, enjoyment and use of the demised premises and/or disconnecting any amenity /services in the demised premises morefully described in the schedule to the judges summons pending disposal of the arbitration proceedings. For Applicant : Mr.Manoj Menon For Respondent : Mr.Satish Parasaran (SC) for M/s.Arun C Mohan, Caveator
O R D E R
These applications have been filed for interim injunctions on the ground that due to pandemic situation, rent as agreed between the parties could not be paid.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent through video conferencing.
3. It is the main contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the respondent is taking advantage of the COVID situation and trying to disconnect the basic amenities to the applicant. If the same is disconnected, the applicant would be put to irreparable hardship, as they are operating chillers in their premises.
4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the arbitral tribunal has already been constituted and only dispute between the parties is as to whether the applicant is liable to pay the rent during the lock down period. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the applicant shall continue to pay the rent regularly, the respondent has no intention to interfere with the possession of the applicant.
5. The matter has already been referred to arbitration and the arbitrator has also been appointed. The issue involved is mainly with regard to the payment of rent. Whether or not the applicant is entitled to waiver of rent, the same has to be decided by the tribunal. However, taking note of the lock down period, the applicant is directed to continue to pay the rent from August, 2020 onwards without prejudice to their contentions before the arbitrator. Parties are at liberty to agitate their legal issues before the learned arbitrator. Since, the matter is already referred to arbitrator, this Court is not inclined to pass any interim Order. It is open to the applicant to go before the arbitrator, if the need arises.
6. With these observations, these applicants are disposed of. 22.07.2020 vrc
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
vrc O.A.Nos.262 & 263 of 2020 22.07.2020