Ambuj Hotel And Real Estate PVT LTD vs. Indian Railway Catering Tourism Corporation And Anr.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Ambuj Hotel and Real Estate Pvt Ltd, filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The petitioner was the highest bidder for onboard catering services for train 20707-08, SC-VSKP VANDEBHARATEXPRESS, with an annual license fee of Rs. 2,12,40,000/- (including GST). The Letter of Award was dated 07.08.2024, and the Letter of Commencement was issued on 19.12.2024, permitting operations from 19.01.2025. Subsequently, the respondent, Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation (IRCTC), demanded a pro-rata increase in license fee due to an increase in the number of coaches from 8 to 16, citing Clause 3.3 of the Master License Agreement. The petitioner argued that the RFP initially stated 21 coaches, then reduced to 8, and later increased to 16. The petitioner had already made the first payment but was not provided the train to commence operations.
Held
The Court did not definitively rule on the legality of the increased license fee demand as a final determination. Instead, the parties reached a settlement during the proceedings. The petitioner agreed to deposit an additional sum of Rs. 2,12,40,000/- with the respondent within four weeks. Upon receipt of this payment, the respondent was directed to hand over train No. 20707-08, SC-VSKP VANDE BHARAT EXP to the petitioner within one week thereafter. The Court explicitly stated that this order was without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties in the ongoing arbitration proceedings. The petition was disposed of based on these terms, effectively resolving the immediate dispute regarding the commencement of services pending the arbitration outcome. No specific GST provisions were discussed or ruled upon.
Key Issues
1. Whether the demand for an increased license fee by Respondent No. 2 is illegal, arbitrary, unjustified, and unconstitutional, in violation of the pre-bidding clarification dated 16.02.2024, Corrigendum 3 dated 16.02.2024, Bid document dated 07.06.2024, Master License Agreement, Letter of Award dated 07.08.2024, and their Letter of Commencement dated 19.12.2024? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the increase in license fee was illegal and arbitrary, violating the terms of the bid documents and agreements. They contended that the number of coaches had fluctuated, and despite making the initial payment, the train was not being handed over for commencement of services. Respondent's Contention: The respondent disputed the petitioner's claims and justified the demand for an increased license fee based on the increase in the number of coaches, citing Clause 3.3 of the Master License Agreement. The judgment records that the respondent disputed the petitioner's claims but does not detail further arguments or specific provisions relied upon by the respondent.
Sections Cited
Section 9, Section 21
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R % 17.09.2025
This is a petition filed under Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking the following prayers against the respondents:- “a. To enforce the letter of commencement dated 19.12.2024 issued by Respondent no. 2 and for directing Respondent no. 2 to immediately hand over the train 20707- 08, SC-VSKP VANDEBHARATEXPRESS to the Petitioner. b. Quash/set-aside by declaring the notices dated 10.01.2025, 15.01.2025, 18.01.2025 and 17.02.2025 and any consequential letter/notice issued by the Respondent No. 2, as null and void, whereby Respondent No. 2 is demanding an illegal, arbitrary, unjustified and unconstitutional increase in the license fee in violation of the pre-bidding clarification dated 16.02.2024, Corrigendum 3 dated 16.02.2024, Bid document dated 07.06.2024, Master License Agreement, Letter of Award dated 07.08.2024 and their Letter of Commencement dated 19.12.2024.”
The brief facts are that the petitioner is engaged in the business of This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2025 at 12:58:24
catering licenses in the country and has been associated with onboard catering services with the Indian Railways. The respondent No. 2 floated a tender for onboard catering services for a period of 5 years and further extendable upto 2 years for the following 3 trains:- a. 20707-08, SC-VSKP VANDE BHARAT EXP b. 12713-14, BZA-SC SATAVAHANA EXP c. 22715-16, KCG-MDU SF EXP
As per the Bidding Document, the catering services were to be provided in the trains carrying 21 coaches.The petitioner being the highest bidder was issued the Letter of Award dated 07.08.2024 for providing onboard catering services for train No. 20707-08, SC-VSKP VANDE BHARAT EXP with an annual license fee of Rs. 2,12,40,000/- (including GST).
On 19.12.2024, the respondent No. 2 issued letter of commencement to permit the petitioner to begin catering services from 19.01.2025. The contract was to run from 19.01.2025 to 18.01.2030 on the annual license fee mentioned above.
On 10.01.2025, it was noticed that the number of the coaches in the train have been increased from 8 to 16 which necessitated levy of pro- rata licence fee as per Clause No. 3.3 of the Master License Agreement.Consequently, the respondent No. 2 demanded a pro rata increase in license fee of Rs. 2,12,40,000/- (including GST).
Ms. Bindra, learned counsel for the petitioner states that as per the RFP, the number of coaches were 21, subsequently, reduced to 8 and thereafter increased to 16. The petitioner has already made the first payment of Rs. 2,12,40,000/- and despite the same, the train is not This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2025 at 12:58:24
being provided for the petitioner to commence its operations.
The same is disputed by Mr. Agarwal, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
However, the petitioner, without prejudice to its rights and contentions, states that the petitioner shall deposit another sum of Rs. 2,12,40,000/- with the respondent No. 2 within 4 weeks from today.
On making the payment of Rs. 2,12,40,000/-, the respondent No. 2 shall hand over the train No. 20707-08, SC-VSKP VANDE BHARAT EXP to the petitioner within 1 week thereafter.
The order passed today is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties in the arbitration proceedings and the petitioner has already issued a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 11. The petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms. JASMEET SINGH, J SEPTEMBER 17, 2025 / (MS) This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2025 at 12:58:24
Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.