Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
IN THE MATTER OF :-
//Versus//
1. That the petitioner has filed the aforesaid writ petition before this
hon’ble court.
2. That the respondent have submitted their reply before this hon’ble
4. That, the petition is pending since 2010 and reply has already been
filed by respondent
The Hon’ble the Chief Justice of the High Court of Delhi and His
the applicant/Petitioner
New Delhi-110001
3. Names of the other parties to the M/s Maa Tara Trader
Addresses. Howrah-1
4. Name and addresses of the Arbitrators, Ms. Padmakshi Raheja
them.
6. Qualification of the Arbitrator, if any Each of the parties to
Third Arbitrator.
7. That the present application u/s 11 of the Arbitration And Conciliation
Act, 1996 has been preferred by the applicant above named praying for
has failed to nominate its arbitrator from the panel of arbitrator provided
by the applicant.
hereunder::
catering & tourism services. The claimant has pioneered online rail
to float a tender and invite two bid tender system from Carrying
with this objective the Claimant Corporation vide its Tender Notice
and invited bids from CFAs and transporters for carrying out the
work of distribution of Rail Neer from the above said Rail Neer
most humbly submitted that as per the LOA, the respondent was
further relevant to submit here that at the relevant time there was
a due of Rs. 63,36,537/- upon the respondent at the time of
as Annexure P/3.
i. That the respondent was required to place indent to the Rail Neer
Water crates at its own cost and risks. It was further mandated in
Neer crates.
k. That it is pertinent to mention here that the respondent was also
the licensees of the static catering units and mobile catering units
towards sale of Rail Neer, on behalf of IRCTC and further to
stock transfer.
m. That the claimant placed indent to Rail Neer Plant from time to
the contract.
o. That on the basis of the request made by the respondent herein,
before the expiry of the terms of the extended period. A true copy
Annexure P/4.
p. That it is pertinent to mention here that since the claimant was
that the respondent always failed to deposit the entire dues of the
claimant and always requested for some more time to enable the
CFA was under process and the term of the contract of supply by
the respondent was supposed to end on 31-03-2009, keeping in
the contract period for another six months. A true copy of the
Annexure P/6.
s. That vide letter dated 31-03-2010, the claimant further extended
the contract period for another six months. A true copy of the
Annexure P/7.
t. That vide letter dated 01-07-2010, the claimant further extended
the contract period for another one months. A true copy of the
Annexure P/8.
u. That vide letter dated 27-07-2010, the claimant further extended
the contract period for another six months. A true copy of the
Annexure P/9.
v. That it is pertinent to mention here that all the above mentioned
under clause 5.1 of the GCC and thus the services of the
contract.
w. That it is pertinent to mention here that since the very inception
agreement and with dishonest intention, did not deposit the entire
proceeds with the claimant. The respondent infact kept on
Annexure P/10.
x. That since the respondent failed to deposit the entire amount
the financial year 2013-14 and thus by end of financial year 2012-
IPC.
cc. That since the respondent stopped making payments of the
contract.
dd. That it is pertinent to mention here that before the conciliation
certain liability against the total claim of the claimant herein. The
since the year 2004 till the year 2013 and the same was duly
and failing to clear the dues of the claimant within the stipulated
the above said letter and suggested name of one Kamal Mohan
Annexure P/13.
hh. That the Competent Authority vide its letter dated 11-11-2013
the same the Ld. Sole Arbitrator vide its report dated 17-06-2014
Competent Authority.
nn. That it is pertinent to mention here that rather than appointing
A true copy of the W.P. No. 27627/2014 filed before the Hon’ble
Annexure P/18.
oo. That in the meantime since the respondent herein started
the Ld. Court of ACJM, Danapur for registration of FIR against the
mention here that the Ld. Court in Danapur treated the said
Danapur and hence the Ld. Court vide its order dated 02-09-2014
after waiting for response from the respondent for more than a
on 29-07-2015.
tt. That on receiving the aforesaid two communications dated 18-06-
A true copy of the CAN No. 7151/2015 and CAN 7050/2015 both
further recorded in its order dated 21-08-2015 that the CAN 7151
of 2015 and CAN 7150 of 2015 were being dismissed with the
Annexure P/24.
ww.That the petitioner herein filed its Claim Petition before the Ld.
before the Ld. Arbitral Tribunal and the counsel requested for
adjournment to enable the Ld. Counsel to file the Counter
filing its defence, with the motive of delaying the proceedings filed
Annexure P/27.
zz. It is relevant to submit here that the respondent by way of the
the same must be challenged within 30 days from the date when
P/29.
ddd. That during the pendency of the Application u/s 16 of the
Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioner herein filed its reply wherein
it was stated that the same was not maintainable however the Ld.
Tribunal vide its order dated 23-06-2016 was pleased to allow the
by the respondent herein and held that the Ld. Tribunal has no
P/30.
fff. That this Hon’ble Court vide its order dated 14-07-2016 passed in
OMP (I) (Comm.) No. 106/2016 was pleased to allow the prayer
the parties that in case of any breach/dispute arising between the parties to
the agreement then the same shall be resolved by way of arbitration Clause
5.2. The Conciliator shall make the settlement agreement after the
chosen shall choose the third arbitrator from the said panel,
panel.
Eight (28) days after they have been appointed, then IRCTC
may nominate the third arbitrator from the panel for the
arbitration.
made.
5.10. The parties agree to comply with the awards resulting from
10. That in view of the above the parties have agreed to resolve their
exceeded Rs. 15 Lacs and above to adjudicate upon the dispute which
11. That the Respondents have failed to perform their part of the agreement
though the applicant has performed it’s part of the obligations and
has been delaying and evading to appear before the forums wherein the
respondent has been asked to appear in connection with the dispute with
the applicant herein with a motive to frustrate the claim of the applicant
continuous losses due to one reason or the other by the respondent. The
which is evident from the fact that the the respondent only appeared
before the Ld. Court of Judicial Magistrate after the Ld. Court issued Non
further submitted that till date the respondent firm proprietor has not
appeared before the Hon’ble Trial Court in Patna and in all the likelihood
the Ld. Trial Court would initiate proceedings under Section 82 and
13. That it is also clear from the act of the respondent that rather than
appointing its arbitrator, the respondent kept silent all the time and only
when the Ld. Tribunal was constituted then appeared and challenged the
respondent is making all its efforts to frustrate the legitimate claim of the
14. That it is further relevant to submit here that the respondent after nearly
were closed then again with ulterior motive approached Hon’ble High
15. That after the conciliation proceedings failed the Petitioner invoked
nominee to act as Arbitrator on its behalf within ten days from the panel
parties.
16. That in terms of Section 11(4) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996,
days (30 days) from the receipt of the request to do so from the other
party then the appointment shall be made, upon the request of a party,
by the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the Hon’ble Supreme Court or as the case
may be by the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the Hon’ble High Court or any
17. That the cause of action arose in New Delhi as the agreement between
the parties was entered into in New Delhi and also as per Clause 5.5 (f)
18. That the aforesaid cause of action has arisen in New Delhi as the
agreement was arrived at New Delhi and the part payments were made
from time to time by the respondent and accepted in New Delhi. The
parties have also agreed and accepted in the agreement to sell that only
19. That it is most humbly submitted that the cause of action arose on 11-
appoint arbitrator.
20. The Petitioner had commenced the Arbitration proceedings against the
much as the Ld. Tribunal has refused to continue with the arbitral
proceedings in view of its lack of jurisdiction and till date the respondent
Conciliation Act, 1996 nor there is any petition pending relating to the
subject matter of the above captioned petition before any court of law or
Hon’ble Court is fixed above Rs.1 crore as the petitioner is claiming more
than Rs. 5,34,74,373/- (Rupees Five Crores Thirty Four Lacs Seventy
Act, 2015.
26. That the present petition is bona fide and it is in the interest of justice
that the same may kindly be allowed in terms of the relief sought herein.
PRAYER
ii. pass ad interim exparte order in terms of prayer (a) above and
iv. pass any other and/or further orders which this Hon’ble Court
may deem fit, just and proper, in the facts of the case.
Through
Divya Prakash Pande
Advocate of the Applicant
323, New Lawyers Chamber,
Supreme Court of India, Bhagwan
Das Road,
New Delhi-110001
VERIFICATION
Verified at New Delhi on this day of September, 2016 that the contents of
paras 1 to 26 of the Application are true to my knowledge and belief and is
based on the records maintained by the applicant company and on the legal
advice received and nothing material has been concealed thereof.
Applicant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____/2016
IN THE MATTER OF :-
//Versus//
I, Rajesh Dhawan, S/o Sh. Late P.P.Dhawan, aged 53 years, working as Joint
registered office at 11th Floor, Statesman Building, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-
110001, presently in New Delhi do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under: -
fully conversant with the facts circumstance of the case and competent to
and the same is read and understood by me and the content of the same
are true to my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been
concealed therefrom.
3. That the contents of the instant affidavit are true and correct to the best of
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
I, Rajesh Dhawan , above named Deponent verify that the contents of Para 1 to 3
of the affidavit are true to the best of my knowledge. No part of it is false and
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
Arbitration Application NO. _____/2016
IN THE MATTER OF :-
//Versus//
I, Rajesh Dhawan, S/o Sh. Late P.P.Dhawan, aged 53 years, working as Joint
registered office at 11th Floor, Statesman Building, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-
110001, presently in New Delhi do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under: -
fully conversant with the facts circumstance of the case and competent to
2. That the accompanying Application u/s 151 of C.P.C. has been drafted by my
and the content of the same are true to my knowledge and belief and
3. That the contents of the instant affidavit are true and correct to the best of
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
I, Rajesh Dhawan, above named Deponent verify that the contents of Para 1 to 3
of the affidavit are true to the best of my knowledge. No part of its is false and
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____/2016
IN THE MATTER OF :-
//Versus//
URGENT APPLICATION
To,
The Registrar,
New Delhi
Sir,
Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed today on -09-2016. You
are requested to treat the petition as urgent as interim directions have been
IN THE MATTER OF :-
//Versus//
NOTICE OF MOTION
Delhi
IN THE MATTER OF :-
//Versus//
MEMO OF PARTY
//Versus//
Howrah-1 …….……Respondent
IN THE MATTER OF :-
//Versus//
To,
The Hon’ble Chief Justice and his companion judge of High Court of Delhi at
New Delhi.
1. That the present application u/s 11 of the Arbitration And Conciliation Act,
2. That the facts of the case have been detailed in the Petition u/s 9 of the
Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 and are not being repeated in the
present application for the sake of brevity. The petitioners crave leave of the
Hon’ble Court to refer to and rely upon the same for the purposes of this
application.
3. That due to the paucity of time the petitioner may be exempted from filing
the typed copies of the Dim Annexure P/1 to P/30 which are being filed by
copies of the Dim Annexure then the petitioner would face irreparable loss
and sufferings and moreover the purpose of filing the petition would
frustrate.
5. That the balance of convenience lies in the favour of the petitioner herein
and there is all likelihood that the petitioner may succeed before this Hon’ble
Court.
PRAYER
pleased to::
(i) Exempt the petitioner from filing the typed copies of the
of the case.
Through
IN THE MATTER OF :-
//Versus//
To,
The Hon’ble Chief Justice and his companion judge of High Court of Delhi at
New Delhi.
2. That the facts of the case have been detailed in the Petition u/s 11 of the
Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 and are not being repeated in the
present application for the sake of brevity. The petitioner craves leave of
the Hon’ble Court to refer to and rely upon the same for the purposes of
this application.
alongwith the petition and may be exempted from filing originals of the
4. That in case the petitioner is not granted exemption from filing the
Original Documents then the petitioner would face irreparable loss and
frustrate.
5. That the balance of convenience lies in the favour of the petitioner herein
and there is all likelihood that the petitioner may succeed before this
Hon’ble Court.
PRAYER
pleased to::
(i) Exempt the petitioner from filing the Original documents; and
(ii) pass such other or further order as this Hon’ble Court deem fit and
Through
IN THE MATTER OF :-
//Versus//
Nature of Matter::
ACT, 1996.
Statute Involved::
Advocate::
IN THE MATTER OF :-
//Versus//
1. Index 1 -
IN THE MATTER OF :-
//Versus//
FOLDER –III
1. Index - 1 -
2. Vakalatnama
IN THE MATTER OF :-
//Versus//
AFFIDAVIT/STATEMENT OF TRUTH
fully conversant with the facts circumstance of the case and competent
2. I am sufficiently conversant with the facts and have also examined all
3. I say that the statements made in para no. 1 to para no. 14 are true to
27 are based on legal advice and the last para is a humble prayer.
and been disclosed and copies of the necessary documents thereof are
7. I state that the annexures hereto are true copies of the documents
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
I, Rajesh Dhawan, above named Deponent verify that the contents of Para 1
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____/2016
IN THE MATTER OF :-
//Versus//
No Caveat Notice has been received by the petitioner nor its Counsel till date in
IN THE MATTER OF :-
//Versus//
M/s Maa Tara Traders ………….………………Respondent
FOLDER –I
1. Urgent Application - -
2. Notice of Motion
3. Memo of party
1. Application under section 11 of the arbitration and
affidavit.