Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2026 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Delhi/
  4. 2024/
  5. November

Cremica Food Park Private Limited vs. M/s Trustable Foods India Pvt Ltd

Decided on 29 November 2024• Citation: ARB.P./1710/2024• High Court of Delhi
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                 $~33                                                             
                 *    IN THE   HIGH  COURT   OF DELHI   AT NEW   DELHI            
                 %                                  Date of Decision: 29.11.2024  
                 +    ARB.P. 1710/2024                                            
                      CREMICA   FOOD PARK  PRIVATE  LIMITED   .....Petitioner     
                                     Through:  Mr. Saransh Garg, Adv. (through v/c)
                                     versus                                       
                      M/S TRUSTABLE   FOODS  INDIA PVT LTD    .....Respondent     
                                     Through:  Mr. Rahul Kochar, Adv.             
                      CORAM:                                                      
                      HON'BLE   MR. JUSTICE SACHIN  DATTA                         
                 SACHIN  DATTA,  J. (ORAL)                                        
                 1.   The present petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and
                 Conciliation Act, 196 (hereinafter ‘the A&C Act’) seeks the constitution of
                 an arbitral tribunal to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.
                 2.   The disputes between the parties have arisen in context of a Lease
                 Deed dated 11.09.2018, by virtue of which, land admeasuring 4551 square
                 mtrs located at Plot no.3 & 4 at Hect 0-45-51 Hect Khewat, No. 74 min
                 Khautani no.86min Kharsa No 3545 land measuring in 00-38-86; out of
                 share 422/1943; land measuring 00-08-44 hect Khewat, No. 156 min 
                 Khautani, No.180 min Kharsa No 3556; land measuring in 00-44-47 Hect,
                 Out of share 140/4447; land measuring 00-01-40 hect Khewat. No. 172min
                 Khautani, No.198 min Kharsa No 3557; land measuring in 00-40-60 Hect.
                 Out of share 1573/2030; land measuring 00-31-46, hect Khewat. No.229
                 min Khautani.. No.257min Kharsa No 3558; land measuring in 00-70-13
                 Hect. Out of share 421/7013; land measuring 00-04-21 hect Jamabandi year
    Signature Not Verified                                                        
                 ARB.P. 1710/2024                                  Page 1 of 4    
    Digitally Signed By:ROHIT                                                     
    KUMAR PATEL                                                                   
    Signing Date:04.12.2024                                                       
    13:17:32                                                                      

                 2012-2013 Village Singan alsia Sur Kalan Sub-Tehsil Dulehar Distt. Una
                 H.P Village Singha, Tehsil Haroli (hereinafter ‘subject property’) was leased
                 out to the respondent for setting up a ‘Mega Food Park’ for the purpose of
                 manufacturing, processing and storage of food and agro-processing.
                 3.   Disputes between the parties have arisen on account of non-payment
                 of the outstanding monetary entitlements of the petitioner under the said
                 lease deed, for which a demand notice dated 05.02.2024 was sent by the
                 petitioner.                                                      
                 4.   Clause 9 of the said lease deed contains the arbitration clause and
                 reads as under:-                                                 
                       “9. JURISDICTION AND ARBITRATION                           
                       9.1 This lease deed shall be construed and interpreted in accordance
                       with and governed by the laws of India and he courts at New
                       Delhi/Himachal Pradesh shall have jurisdiction over all matters arising
                       out of or relating to this lease deed.                     
                       9.2 All dispute and differences in relation to the applicability,
                       interpretation, rights and obligation of the parties hereunder and/or
                       arising under these presents including various termination clause(s) as
                       mentioned above shall be referred to a sole arbitrator mutually decided
                       by both the parties, within 30(thirty) days from the date of receipt of a
                       request of nomination of sole arbitrator, the director of both, lessor and
                       lessee shall, jointly nominate a sole arbitrator and issue communication
                       in respect of the same to the parties. In case the sole arbitrator is not
                       nominated within the stipulated herein above, the parties will be at
                       liberty to invoke the provision of the Arbitration and Conciliation
                       Act,1996 and any subsequent amendment thereto or enactment(s) in
                       substitution thereof, for appointment of sole arbitrator.  
                       9.3 The arbitral proceedings shall be conducted in New Delhi, in English
                       language and the parties agree that, the arbitral award shall be binding
                       and enforceable against both the parties.                  
                       9.4 During the arbitration, the parties shall continue to fulfil their
                       respective obligations under this lease deed except for such obligations,
                       which are the subject matter of the arbitration”           
                 5.   Disputes having arisen, a notice invoking arbitration dated 24.04.2024
                 was issued by the petitioner; proposing the names of two persons, any of
    Signature Not Verified                                                        
                 ARB.P. 1710/2024                                  Page 2 of 4    
    Digitally Signed By:ROHIT                                                     
    KUMAR PATEL                                                                   
    Signing Date:04.12.2024                                                       
    13:17:32                                                                      

                 whom,  could be appointed as a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes
                 between the parties. A reply dated 23.05.2024 to the aforesaid notice was
                 sent by the petitioner, refuting the claims raised by the petitioner in the
                 invocation notice, objecting to the sole arbitrator being unilaterally
                 appointed by the petitioner as well as seeking time to file a detailed reply.
                 That a detailed reply was sent by the respondent on 28.08.2024, refuting the
                 claims raised by the petitioner in its invocation notice, on their merits as
                 well as raising a claim of its own under the said lease deed.    
                 6.   Since no further communications were exchanged and the parties
                 were unable to mutually agree to the appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to
                 adjudicate the disputes between the parties, the present petition has come to
                 be filed.                                                        
                 7.   Learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute the existence of
                 the arbitration agreement and accedes to the appointment of an independent
                 Sole Arbitrator by this Court, to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.
                 8.   Accordingly, Mr. Raman  Yadav, Advocate  (Mob. No.  +91     
                 9999345388) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes
                 between the parties.                                             
                 9.   The respondent shall be at liberty to raise appropriate objections as
                 regards jurisdiction / arbitrability which shall be considered by the arbitrator
                 in accordance with law.                                          
                 10.  The respondent shall also be at liberty to file counter-claims before
                 the learned Sole Arbitrator.                                     
                 11.  The learned Sole Arbitrator shall be entitled to fee in accordance with
                 the IVth Schedule of the A&C Act; or as may otherwise be agreed to
                 between the parties and the learned Sole Arbitrator.             
    Signature Not Verified                                                        
                 ARB.P. 1710/2024                                  Page 3 of 4    
    Digitally Signed By:ROHIT                                                     
    KUMAR PATEL                                                                   
    Signing Date:04.12.2024                                                       
    13:17:32                                                                      

                 12.  The  learned Sole Arbitrator may proceed with the arbitration
                 proceedings subject to furnishing to the parties requisite disclosure as
                 required under Section 12 of the A&C Act.                        
                 13.  Needless to say, nothing in this order shall be construed as an
                 expression of opinion of this court on the merits of the case.   
                 14.  The present petition stands disposed of in the above terms. 
                                                            SACHIN  DATTA,  J     
                 NOVEMBER    29, 2024                                             
    Signature Not Verified                                                        
                 ARB.P. 1710/2024                                  Page 4 of 4    
    Digitally Signed By:ROHIT                                                     
    KUMAR PATEL                                                                   
    Signing Date:04.12.2024                                                       
    13:17:32