High Court of Delhi

Realistic Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Karanpreet Singh Walia and Ors.

MANU/DE/3481/2021

13.12.2021

Commercial

Agreements relating to immovable properties, which are to be used exclusively in trade and commerce are covered within the ambit of 'commercial dispute'

The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 impugns the order passed by District Judge, whereby the Commercial Court has held that, the suit filed on behalf of the Petitioner/Plaintiff Company does not fall within the definition of 'commercial dispute' under Section 2(1)(c) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

The Petitioner/Plaintiff Company is into the business of providing real estate consultancy. An agreement dated 21st September, 2019 was entered into between the Petitioner/Plaintiff Company and the Respondent no. 1/Defendant no. 1 for the Petitioner/Plaintiff Company to provide consultancy and brokerage services in relation to the leasing of the property of the Respondents/Defendants to the prospective lessee being Domino's Pizza India Pvt. Ltd, as introduced by the Petitioner/Plaintiff Company. The scope of the services was to facilitate the leasing of the aforesaid premises for commercial purposes by arranging site inspections, organizing meetings and discussions with the prospective lessees. In respect of the aforesaid services, a fee was payable by the Respondent no. 1/Defendant no. 1 to the Petitioner/Plaintiff Company.

It is the case of the Petitioner/Plaintiff Company that, the Respondents/Defendants did not pay the requisite fee in terms of the aforesaid agreement after the Petitioner/Plaintiff Company negotiated with Jubilant Foodworks Limited, who holds the master franchise of Domino's Pizza, for materializing a commercial lease transaction in respect of the said property of the Respondents/Defendants. Therefore, the suit from which the present petition arises was filed as a commercial suit seeking recovery of Rs. 3,21,463 along with pendente lite and future interest.

All agreements relating to immovable properties, which are to be used exclusively in trade and commerce are covered within the ambit of 'commercial dispute' in terms of Section 2(1)(c)(vii) of the Commercial Courts Act.

In the present case, the property in question of the Respondents/Defendants for leasing of which the agreement 21st September, 2019 was entered into between the parties, was a property to be leased for commercial use. Even otherwise, in terms of Section 2(1)(c)(x) of the Commercial Courts Act, all management and consultancy agreements would be covered within the ambit of commercial disputes. A bare reading of the agreement in question makes it clear that, the aforesaid agreement is in the nature of a consultancy agreement.

The agreement in question between the Petitioner/Plaintiff Company and the Respondent no. 1/Defendant no. 1 would be covered under Section 2(1)(c)(vii) as well as Section 2(1)(c)(x) of the Commercial Courts Act. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the Commercial Court is patently erroneous and liable to be set aside. The impugned order is set aside. Petition allowed.

Tags : Immovable properties Trade Commercial dispute

Share :