LAWS(DLH)-2017-1-80

BALESHWAR SHARMA Vs. NAGESHWAR PANDEY

Decided On January 13, 2017
Baleshwar Sharma Appellant
V/S
Nageshwar Pandey Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two petitions filed by Baleshwar Sharma against Nageshwar Pandey, the Respondent. Arb. P. No.254/2015 has been filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) seeking the appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties arising out of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 24 th May, 2014. The companion petition, OMP (I) No.193/2015, has been filed under Section 9 of the Act seeking interim reliefs.

(2.) The background facts are that the Respondent is stated to have approached the Petitioner in April, 2007 with a proposal of jointly purchasing and developing land in Goa. The Petitioner states that the Respondent informed him that he had already entered into an Agreement to Sell dated 8th January, 2007 in respect of two plots, being plot No. D-3 admeasuring 68,325 sq. mts. and plot No. D-1 admeasuring 65,000 sq.mts. at Bainguinim, Tiswadi Taluka within the jurisdiction of Village Panchayat of Se (Old Goa) surveyed under Survey No.26/2. He informed the Petitioner that the owners of the said plots were Mr. R. C. P. Navelcar and Mr. Mahesh R. P. Navelcar and that the said owners had obtained requisite sanctions for the development of the plots for the purposes of residential or commercial or group housing etc. The Respondent is also said to have assured the Petitioner that he had duly verified the antecedents of the land and other details. He claimed to have paid almost Rs. 5 crores to the owners of the property stating that the balance consideration was yet to be paid.

(3.) The Petitioner states that on the above assurance, he entered into an MoU dated 5th June, 2007 with the Respondent and paid a sum of Rs.3,95,00,000. Under the said MoU dated 5th June, 2007, the parties agreed that they would form a partnership firm having 50% share each. The Petitioner claims to have made further payments of Rs. 25 lakh and Rs. 15 lakh through the account of his firm, M/s. E-Square International, to the Respondent.