ARDEE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. Vs. ANURADHA BHATIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide this judgment, I dispose of both the appeals as the matter in issue is involved in both the cases is the same and both the cases are between the same parties and facts are also similar in both the cases.

(2.) The present appeals have been filed against the order of the arbitrator dated 10.07.2014 whereby the arbitrator has directed the appellant to furnish the security to the extent of claim in dispute in favour of the respondents. The facts of the present cases which led to the arbitration proceedings in short are as under:

(3.) In both the cases, there were two separate Flat Buyer Agreements between the respondents and the appellant for sale of two flats measuring 15000 sq. ft. on the second floor in Plaza Gardenia, Ardee City, Gurgaon for a total consideration of Rs.45 lacs each. On the same day, two separate a Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) were also drawn between the parties and according to the said MOUs the sale consideration of Rs.45 lakhs was to be paid by the respondents to the appellant by transfer of certain lands owned by the respondents in the name of the appellant company. It was agreed in the said MOUs that the appellant would continue to pay rental compensation of Rs.3,75,000/- per month in each MOU to the respondents till the time the possession of the said flats at Plaza Gardenia, Ardee City, Gurgaon is handed over to the respondents. Appellant paid the rental compensation in terms of the MOU till 16.09.2010 and thereafter they stopped paying the money. The respondents invoked the arbitration clause of each MOU vide arbitration petitions no.239/2011 & 240/2011 and also filed a petitions under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as O.M.P.Nos.583/2011 & 584/2011. This court disposed of the OMP No.583/2011 & 584/2011 filed under Section 9 of the Act with direction that the petitioners can seek the interim relief before the arbitrator in terms of Section 17 of the Act. In Arb.P.Nos.239/2011 & 240/2011 the arbitrator was appointed by this court. The arbitral proceedings had started before the arbitrator and the petitioner also filed the applications under Section 17 of the Act. The said applications were disposed of by the arbitrator on 05.03.2014 whereby the appellant was directed to pay to the respondents the compensation amount as agreed between the parties in the MOUs from October, 2010 onward. The said order was challenged by the appellant vide Arbitration Appeal Nos.18/2014 & 19/2014. Meanwhile the arbitrator passed another order dated 10.07.2014 in both the arbitral proceedings, which amounts to modification of the order and the order dated 05.03.2014 culminated into the said order. The appellant had withdrawn the Arbitration Appeal Nos.18/2014 & 19/2014.