National Enterprises & Anr v. Dee Universal Ltd

Delhi High Court · 29 Mar 2013 · 2013:DHC:8429
Manmohan Singh
O.M.P. 317/2013
2013:DHC:8429
civil petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court granted interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act by staying the revocation of a Leave and License Agreement until the petitioner vacated the premises by an agreed date.

Full Text
Translation output
$-2 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
O.M.P. 317/2013
NATIONAL ENTERPRISES & ANR Petitioners
Through Mi'.Atul Batia, Adv. with Mr.Sumit Jidoni, Advs. along with petitioner
No.2 in person.
VERSUS
DEE UNIVERSAL LTD Respondent
Through Mr.H.L.Tiku,Sr.Adv. with Mr.Varun Kumar;Ms.Saloni
Chowdhary & Ms.Mandeep Kaur, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH
29.03.2013 The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 9of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking stay ofthe operation of the letter dated 2E^ Mai^ch, 2013 issued by the respondent, revoking
'Leave and License Agreement'dated 9^'^ Febmary,2011 in respect ofShop
No.FC-17,Mall DLF Place, Saket,New Delhi.
Issue notice to the respondent. Learned counsel appearing on behalf ofthe respondent accepts notice. After some hearing, petitioner No.2 who is present in Court has made a statement which has been separately recorded, in which the petitioner undertook to vacate the premises which has taken imder the License Agreement,on or before 30^'^ June,2013. The petitioner
No.2 agrees to abide by the terms and conditions ofthe agreement during
2013:DHC:8429 f 3 the said period, i.e. up to 30^'' June, 2013 and also to abide by the undertaking given before this Court. The petition is aecordingly disposed of, with the direction that during this period, the respondent shall not disconnect the electricity and water or prevent the employees and/or raw material of the petitioner from entering the premises or in any manner causing obstruction or doing any act which may have the effect ofpetitioner not being able to run the outlet.
Dasti,under the signatures ofthe Court Master.
MARCH 29,2013/ka 2013:DHC:8429
JUDGMENT