Lipika Ghosh Vs Great Island Development Company And Ors. (Calcutta High Court)
The Calcutta High Court allowed a petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal to resolve disputes arising out of a registered development agreement dated 27.06.2019.
The petitioner, a co-owner of the property, stated that under the development agreement the developer was required to obtain sanction for a G+4 building and pay ₹33,34,000 towards the owner’s allocation. According to the petitioner, only ₹3,50,000 was paid, while the balance ₹29,84,000 remained unpaid. It was alleged that the developer obtained sanction only for a G+2 building, completed construction, handed over flats to purchasers, and falsely disclosed in its income tax return that the entire owner’s allocation had been paid. The petitioner had earlier instituted Title Suit No. 134 of 2024, which was withdrawn on 18.03.2025 without liberty to file a fresh suit. Thereafter, the petitioner invoked the arbitration clause by notice dated 03.04.2025, but the respondents neither appointed an arbitrator nor responded.
The petitioner submitted that a valid arbitration agreement existed, the disputes fell within its scope, and the respondents’ failure to appoint an arbitrator attracted Section 11(6). It was further contended that withdrawal of the earlier civil suit did not bar the present proceedings, that the present claim was for the balance owner’s allocation after adjusting payments received, and that the arbitration agreement survived allegations of frustration or breach.
