Delhi High Court · 2025-03-20
MR PRASHANT KUMAR PARASHAR vs MR SUMIT SINGLA & ANR.
- Citation / case number
- ARB.P.-1182/2024 2025:DHC:1808
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Petitioner
- MR PRASHANT KUMAR PARASHAR
- Respondent
- MR SUMIT SINGLA & ANR.
Judgment text excerpt
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on : 27.02.2025 Pronounced on : 20.03.2025 + ARB.P. 1182/2024 MR PRASHANT KUMAR PARASHAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Varun Katiyar, Advocate. versus MR SUMIT SINGLA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sushant Dogra, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT 1. By way of present petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter, referred to as the ‘A&C Act’), the petitioner seeks appointment of an Arbitral Tribunal comprising of a Sole Arbitrator, to adjudicate upon the disputes that have arisen between the parties. 2. The present dispute arises in the context of a Franchise Agreement dated 19.01.2023 and a Partnership Deed dated 21.08.2023. The aforesaid Franchise Agreement was entered into between the petitioner’s mother Ms. Sanju Parashar and respondent No.1’s company, KoffBew India Private Limited, vide which a franchise of Coffee Brewery was obtained. The petitioner claims that the said franchise business was his own venture pursued through his mother. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed ARB.P. 1182/2024 Page 1 of 10 By:GAUTAM ASWAL Signing Date:21.03.2025 14:58:26 It is claimed that, subsequently, respondent No. 1 suggested to start a formal partnership business with the petitioner, with one more partner for which purpose, the petitioner and respondent Nos. 1 and 2 formed a partnership firm by the name Suyash Food Works, and executed a partnership deed dated 21.08.2023. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that after entering into the Partnership Deed, the petitioner made payments to respondent No.1 on various occasions and requested him to be provided with details and invoices via multiple communications/emails, however, respondent Nos.1 and 2