Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
M/S ESS CEE CEE & ASSOCIATES (INDIA) PVT LTD... Petitioner
Represented by: Mr.Anil Sapra Sr. Adv. with Mr.Sanjeet Singh, Mr.Mridul Yadav, Mr. Akshay Sapra, Advs.
Represented by: Mr.Parvinder Chauhan, Adv. for R-2
Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, Adv. for R-4.
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
C.M.No.18165/2014 (Exemption)
Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the application is allowed.
1. Vide instant petition the petitioner prays for setting aside the order dated 28.10.2014 passed by respondent No.2/Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board.
2. Mr.Parvinder Chauhan, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 on advance notice submits that in the perpetual lease deed dated 05.09.1985 in Clause VI it is stated that in the event of any dispute of 2014:DHC:6093 W.P. (C) 7726/2014 difference, arising under these presents or in connection therewith except as to any matters the decision of which is specially provided by these presents, the same shall be referred to the sole arbitration of any person appointed by the Commissioner of the Lessor.
3. In Clause IX the expression ‘Commissioner’ means the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation of Delhi, for the time being or, in case his designation is changed or his office is abolished, the officer who for the time being is entrusted whether or not in addition to other functions, with the functions similar to those of the Commissioner by whatever designation such officer may be called. The said expression shall further include such officer as may be designated by the lessor to perform the function of the Commissioner under this lease.
4. Mr.Chauhan further submits that lease initially was between the petitioner and MCD, however the MCD has been succeeded by Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board, therefore, the issue raised in the writ petition will be decided in Arbitration. He submits that Chief Executive Officer is the successor of the Commissioner.
5. At this stage, in view of the statement made by learned counsel for respondent No.2, learned counsel for petitioner wishes to withdraw the petition with liberty to get the issue resolved in Arbitration.
6. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.
SURESH KAIT (JUDGE) NOVEMBER 17, 2014 mr