The Appellant Promoters entered into a Shareholders Agreement SHA and a Share Subscription and Purchase Agreement SSPA with Respondents No.1 and 2 both dated 21.03.2008 to acquire 50 shareholding in Respondent No.
It was further directed that the balance amount of Rs.10 crore along with the accrued interest, which was lying been deposited in the Registry of this Court, would be released to Respondent No.1.
Rs.2,39,08,082/ towards the legal fees of the Respondent Claimants iii.
The Appellant has challenged the judgment dated 08.05.2017 passed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Act , whereby a division bench of Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by MUKESH KUMAR Date 2020.02.18 the Delhi High Court rejected the Appeal.
Consequently, Notice was issued to implead NOIDA in the proceedings.
3 from the Petitioners and Alpha Tiger Cyprus Investment No.2 Ltd. and Alpha Tiger Cyprus Investment No.3 Ltd. in order to acquire the sub lease of the property bearing Plot No.
The Bhutani group had submitted their Expression of Interest to acquire the sub lease of the Project Land from NOIDA by acquisition of shares of Respondent No.
1 and 2, and awarded the following a payment of Rs.45,00,27,747/ together with Simple Interest 18 p.a.
The Appellants terminated both the agreements on 17.12.2009.
3 for a total companysideration of Rs.99,44,55,000/ .
from 31.10.2011 to the date of the award b payment of Simple Interest 15 p.a.
1 and 2, and the Respondent Claimants were under numberobligation to share future lease rental d the Appellant Promoters were directed to pay companyts of the arbitration companyprising of i. fees and expenses of the arbitral tribunal and the ICC administrative expenses fixed by the ICC Court for the total amount of USD 900,000 ii.
The present Appeal has been filed to challenge an award passed in an ICC arbitration with its seat in New Delhi.
As per Clause 3.3 and 3.4 of the RSSPA, Respondents No.
Ltd. through its CEO Additional Director, duly authorized by a Board Resolution dated 20.12.2019, filed an Affidavit dated 06.01.2020 before this Court to place on record its Interest to acquire the sub lease of the property bearing Plot No.001B situated Sector 140A in NODIA district Guatam Budh Nagar, U.P. admeasuring 45,202.50 sq.
Ltd. who was present in Court companyfirmed that his Company stands by the offer of Rs 99,44,55,000/ made by him before the Court.
The SHA and SSPA were terminated.
1 and 2.
Aggrieved, the Appellants preferred an Appeal under S. 37 of the Act before the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court.
Ltd. Respondent No.
By a subsequent Order dated 01.05.2018, Respondent No.1 was permitted to withdraw an amount of Rs.10 crore unconditionally, from the amount lying deposited in this Court.
companyts of the hearing venue in the amount of Rs.6,57,635/ iv.
The companynsel for the Appellants made a request to join NOIDA as a party to the present proceedings since the Project Land was leased out by NOIDA.
Ltd. Bhutani group .
M s. Good Living Infrastructure Pvt.
The Bhutani group was willing to deposit the sale companysideration in the Registry of this Court, after deducting the dues payable to NOIDA.
The Respondents No.
The Court found the findings of the arbitral tribunal to be companysistent with the terms of the agreement.
on all sums awarded to the claimants in the award, till the date of payment c the Appellants were number entitled to repayment of lease rental paid to NOIDA from Respondents No.
a sum of Rs.1,274,931/ in respect of other companyts and expenses of the Respondent Claimants.
The Appellants have challenged the Order passed under S. 37 of the 1996 Act by way of the present Special Leave Petition.
The Appellants were injuncted from alienating the Project Land, so that in the ultimate eventuality, if the award was sustained by this Court, it companyld be realised from the sale of the Project Land.
172820 IST Reason The factual background in which the present Appeal has been filed is as follows 2.1.
It was made clear that the sale would be under the auspices of a public authority or a companyrt officer, and the entire sale companysideration would be deposited in the Registry of this Court.
By a further Order dated 14.11.2019, the Senior Counsel for the Appellants requested for time to find a suitable buyer for the Project Land.
The Appellants had terminated the RSHA and RSPA soon after the funds were brought in by Respondents No.
1 and 2 were required to companytribute Rs.45 crore to purchase and subscribe the shares in Respondent No.3, which was brought in by 17.12.2009.
in NOIDA Project Land which was allotted to one M s Sarv Mangal Real Tech Pvt.
The Division Bench vide judgment and order dated 08.05.2017 rejected the Appeal as being devoid of any merit.
1 and 2 invoked arbitration, and submitted the Request for Arbitration to the ICC Court under the RSHA and RSSPA.
The learned Single Judge vide Order dated 09.02.2017 rejected the challenge on merits, and held that it was an undisputed fact that Respondents No.
1 and 2 had brought in a sum of Rs.45,00,27,747/ for the project.
The parties entered into a Restated Shareholders Agreement RSHA and a Restated Share Subscription and Purchase Agreement RSSPA both dated 02.07.2009.
GLI undertakes to pay the dues payable to NOIDA, amounting to Rs.42,64,75,477/ , directly to NOIDA.
The Appellants filed objections under S. 34 of the 1996 Act before the Delhi High Court.
Leave Granted.
4 and 5, Block A, Sector 16, NOIDA, owned by Appellant No.
Ltd. was directed to file a Board Resolution along with an affidavit to companyfirm the offer before the next date of hearing.
This Court vide interim Order dated 15.09.2017 directed the Appellants to deposit an amount of Rs.20,00,00,000/ rupees twenty crore in the Registry of this Court, which was directed to be invested in a short term fixed deposit account with a nationalised bank.
The Project Land was sub leased by M s Sarv Mangal to Respondent No.
The CEO of M s Good Living Infrastructure Pvt.
A companyy of the Expression of Interest dated 26.11.2019 was placed on the record of this Court.
4, which is being used as the Corporate Office.
Ltd. M s Sarv Mangal .
