S K MEHTA Vs. PRADEEP SAITH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question for determination in the instant proceedings is whether licence deed dated 18.3.1994, MOU and Mortgage Deed are ancillary to and part of the main agreement dated 18.3.1994 which was executed between the parties for redevelopment of A-49, Nizamuddin East, New Delhi or not as the respondent has resisted this application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of Arbitrator on the ground that licence deed does not contain the arbitration clause nor do the other documents viz. MOU and Mortgage Deed. The facts relevant for deciding the application need to be put in brief.

(2.) On 18.3.1994, an agreement titled "Property Development Agreement for Redevelopment" was entered into between the parties to construct the entire property bearing No.A-49, Nizamuddin East, New Delhi comprising of entire lower ground floor (Basement), upper ground fioor( ground floor) Duplex first "plus second floor and terrace. In terms of this agreement, the owners share was entire first floor and the second floor (duplex) and 50% of the terrace rights. On the same day i.e. 18.3.1994, licence deed was entered into between the parties. By virtue of this the property bearing No.A-54, Top Floor, Nizamuddin East, New Delhi, which was owned by the petitioner was given to the respondent for temporary occupation as a licenoee to be redelivered to the petitioner against possession of the respondent share's in A-49 Nizamuddin East, New Delhi.

(3.) Since, the respondent demanded surety of Rs.six lacs from the petitioner, mortgage deed dated 18.3.1994 relating to flat no.2/14A, Jangpura A (First Floor), New Delhi, mortgaging the same with the respondent was also executed. On 19.3.1994, supplementary agreement was executed between the parties whereby it was agreed that lower ground floor(basement) which has fallen to the share of the respondent shal1 be purchased by the petitioner against minimum consideration of Ra.15 lakhs.