Fee of the Arbitrator shall be governed by the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: High Court of Delhi.
The Arbitration and reconciliation Act 1966, deals with the different provisions of arbitration but the fees to be paid to the arbitrator sometimes comes into conflict The same issue was dealt in the case of Parminder Jit kaur vs. Splendor Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. By Hon’ble Mr. Justice Suresh Kumar Kait [ARB.P. 841/2021, ARB.P. 842/2021, ARB.P. 843/2021].
The present petitioner have been filled under the provisions of Section11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the appointment of Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute with respondents. With the consent of all the parties the matter is being heard together as the petitions are more or less similar.
According to petitioner(s), respondent No.1 & 2 are companies registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and pursuant to understanding between two of them, respondent No.1-company agreed to undertake to develop and construct IT Building/Tower(s) consisting of IT Office Spaces on the land admeasuring 6.775 acres situated in Sector-58 in the revenue estate of Village Berhampur, Tehsil Shona and District Gurgaon, Haryana owned by respondent No.2. For this purpose, respondents No.1 and 2, who were said to be sister concerns, entered into a Space Buyers Agreement and Memorandum of Understanding dated 28.07.2021 in [ARB.P.841/2021]; Space Buyers Agreement 24.10.2016 and Memorandum of Understanding dated 25.10.2016 in and Space Buyers Agreement and Memorandum of Understanding dated 06.05.2015 in .Where-under respondent No.1 undertook to register conveyance deed in the name of petitioner within six months of receipt of Occupancy Certificate. The petitioner(s) claimed to have paid entire amount of Rs.25,70,400/ towards sales consideration with respect to unit No.404, super area of 765 Sq. on the Second Floor of Tower-D (in ARB.P.841/2021) and Rs.40,94,310/- towards sales consideration with respect to unit No.412, super area of 1306 Sq. on the Second Floor of Tower-D 9 (in ARB.P.842/2021) and Rs.41,48,3201/ – towards sales consideration with respect to unit No.205, super area of 975 Sq. on the Second Floor of Tower-B (ARB.P.843/2021).
The petitioner has submitted that the Space Buyers Agreements and Memorandum of Understandings have been violated, where-under in Clause-31 & 34 it was agreed between the parties that disputes, if any, first shall be tried to be resolved through mutual discussion, failing which the same shall be settled through arbitration. After various demands by the petitioners for the payment of pending assured terms and execution of sale deed, the respondent provided no reply and therefore the present petition is present.
The Delhi High Court following the dictums of the Supreme Court in the cases of Perkins Eastman Architects DPC & Anr Vs. HSCC (India) Ltd. 2019 SCC Online SC 1517, allowed the petitioner and stated that “thus Ms. Anita Shani has been appointed as the sole arbitrator in the present matter. The fee of the learned Arbitrator shall be governed by the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The learned Arbitrator shall ensure compliance of Section 12 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before commencing the arbitration, concluding the present petitions are disposed”
Click here to Read the Judgement
Judgement reviewed by Pratikshya Pattnaik
