M/S Pacifica Hotels INDIA Private Limited vs. M/S K. P. Interiors
Original PDF →Facts
The Petitioner, M/s Pacifica Hotels India Private Limited, filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking various interim reliefs. These included directing the Respondent, M/s K. P. Interiors, to renew a bank guarantee of Rs. 72,74,968/-, furnish a new bank guarantee for Rs. 1,50,00,000/-, and an injunction against disposing of specific properties and a bank account. The disputes arose from a Work Order dated 09.01.2024 for interior works at the Petitioner's hotel property in Ahmedabad. The Petitioner alleged non-compliance with technical specifications, use of sub-standard material, delays, and financial loss, which the Respondent disputed. The parties, through their counsels, agreed to appoint a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes and treat the present petition as an application for interim reliefs.
Held
The Court, with the consent of both parties, appointed Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Senior Advocate, as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes. The Court directed that the present petition be treated as an application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and be considered by the Arbitrator in accordance with law. Liberty was granted to the Respondent to file appropriate applications before the Arbitrator for interim reliefs. The Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, and all rights and contentions of the parties were left open. The Respondent was also granted liberty to file a Counter Claim before the Arbitrator. The digital record of the petition was to be transmitted to the Arbitrator within two weeks.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to interim measures to secure its claims, including renewal and furnishing of bank guarantees, and injunctions against property disposal and bank account freezing, pending arbitration? Petitioner's Arguments: The Petitioner sought to secure its alleged claim amount of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- and ensure the validity of an existing bank guarantee of Rs. 72,74,968/-. They also sought to prevent the Respondent from disposing of specific immovable properties and freezing a particular bank account to safeguard their financial interests. The Petitioner also sought directions for the Respondent to deposit GST amount of Rs. 32,65,363/-. Respondent's Arguments: The Respondent disputed the Petitioner's allegations regarding the quality of work and delays. The Respondent also indicated that they had filed a separate petition under Section 9 of the 1996 Act which had not yet been listed, and sought liberty to file appropriate applications before the Arbitrator for interim reliefs.
Sections Cited
Section 9, Section 17, Section 12
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R %
2025
This petition is filed on behalf of the Petitioner under Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘1996 Act’) seeking the following reliefs:- “a) directing the Respondent to renew the Bank Guarantee in favour of the Petitioner submitted by the Respondent for Rs.72,74,968/- (Rupees Seventy-Two Lakh Seventy Four Thousand Nine Hundred Sixty Eight Only) dated 16.01.2024 and further directing the Respondent to keep the Bank Guarantee valid and in force till the matter is finally decided by the Ld. Arbitrator; b) securing the claim amount of Rs.1,50,00,000 by directing the respondent to furnish a bank guarantee for the said amount of Rs.1,50,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Lakhs only) and further directing the Respondent to keep the Bank Guarantee valid and in force till the matter is finally decided by the Ld. Arbitrator; c) pass injunction against the respondent directing the respondent not to dispose of its properties nos. 1) Ground, 4, M N Estate, Near Lijat Papad Building, Miragaon Kasimira, Thane, Maharashtra-401107; 2) 116, Bhola Bhagwan Industrial Estate, I. B. Patel Road, Goregaon (East), 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 02/08/2025 at 13:19:00 Mumbai-400063; and 3) bank account no. 009830110000026 maintained in Bank of India at branch Goregaon (East), Mumbai having IFSC No. BKID0000098; d) direction be issued to the Respondent to disclose all his assets and properties, and appropriate orders regarding deposit of title deeds and freezing of its bank account, no. 009830110000026 maintained in Bank of India at branch Goregaon (East), Mumbai having IFSC No. BKID0000098 to the extent of claim of the Petitioner, be passed; e) direct the respondent to deposit the GST amount of Rs. 32,65,363/- against the tax invoices raised in relation to the work order.”
Reply has been filed on behalf of the Respondent. Disputes between the parties relate to a Work Order dated 09.01.2024 for execution of interior works at its hotel property, ‘Courtyard By Marriott’, situated in Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Petitioner claims that Respondent has failed to comply with the technical specifications of carrying out the required work and used unapproved and sub-standard material not only causing unwarranted delays in completion of the interior work but also financial loss to the Petitioner. The allegations are strenuously disputed by counsel for the Respondent.
After canvassing some arguments, learned counsels for the parties, on instructions, submit that this Court may appoint a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties with a direction to the Arbitrator to treat this petition as an application for interim reliefs. Additionally, counsel for the Respondent submits that Respondent also seeks urgent interim measures and has filed a separate petition under Section 9 of the 1996 Act in this Court, however, the same has not been listed till date. It is urged that liberty be granted to the Respondent to file appropriate application before the Arbitrator to seek interim reliefs.
With the consent of the parties, Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Senior Advocate (Mobile No. 9811558194) is appointed as sole Arbitrator to 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 02/08/2025 at 13:19:00 adjudicate the disputes between the parties. Fee of the Arbitrator will be fixed as per Fourth Schedule of 1996 Act. Learned Arbitrator shall give disclosure under Section 12 of the 1996 Act before entering upon reference.
Learned Arbitrator is requested to treat this petition as an application under Section 17 of 1996 Act and consider the same in accordance with law. Liberty is granted to the Respondent to file appropriate application before the Arbitrator for interim reliefs, if any.
Digital record of this petition shall be transmitted to the learned Arbitrator by the Registry within two weeks from today.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. All rights and contentions of the parties are left open. It is open to the Respondent to file Counter Claim, if any, before the learned Arbitrator.
Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
JYOTI SINGH, J JULY 30, 2025 S.Sharma/Shivam
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 02/08/2025 at 13:19:00
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.