Delhi High Court Upholds Arbitration Petitions Despite Prior HARERA Proceedings
Appellants Can Pursue Distinct Remedies Under Arbitration and Real Estate Acts
In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court has ruled that petitions under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, are maintainable even after proceedings before the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HARERA) have been initiated. The division bench comprising Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain clarified that simultaneous remedies under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and Arbitration Act are permissible when causes of action differ, thus providing relief to appellants Harmeet Singh Kapoor and others against M/s Neo Developers Pvt Ltd.
The dispute centers around commercial spaces booked by the appellants in Neo Square Mall, Gurugram, where the developer failed to adhere to commitments regarding assured returns and possession timelines. Despite HARERA's order mandating the developer to offer possession and pay arrears, delays persisted, prompting the appellants to seek interim relief through arbitration.
The High Court observed that the HARERA proceedings addressed issues prior to the issuance of completion certificates, while the arbitration petitions focus on subsequent violations by the developer, including leasing out units without handing over possession to appellants. The court asserted its wide powers under Section 9 to protect arbitration subjects, directing the deposit of lease amounts with the Registrar General and appointing a Local Commissioner to inspect the properties.
This judgment underscores the judiciary's role in facilitating justice through arbitration, even amid parallel statutory proceedings. The order provides a procedural safeguard for appellants seeking enforcement of HARERA's directives and protection of their commercial interests.
Bottom Line:
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 9 petitions maintainable despite prior proceedings under RERA; reliefs sought before HARERA and under Section 9 are not for the same cause of action.
Statutory provision(s): Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 9, Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016
Harmeet Singh Kapoor v. M/s Neo Developers Pvt Ltd, (Delhi)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2782329
