Newtech Cinemas Pvt.Ltd vs Osr Cinemas And Entertainment … on 30 November, 2016

2. Admittedly, OSR, VPPL and Newtech had executed a Deed of
Adherence dated 22.07.2014 whereby Newtech had agreed to accept all
rights and obligations of the lessor, VPPL, under the Lease Deed.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent (OSR) does not
dispute the existence of the Lease Deed or the Deed of Adherence. He,
however, has advanced two contentions to oppose the present petition. First,

ARB.P. 606/2016 Page 1 of 7
he submits that since there is no arbitration clause in the Deed of Adherence,
therefore an arbitration agreement does not exist between the parties.
Secondly, he submits that clause 3 of the Deed of Adherence specifically
provides that any dispute arising out of the Deed of Adherence would be
brought in Courts or Tribunal at Mumbai. He submits that in view of the
aforesaid clause, this Court does not have the jurisdiction to entertain the
present petition.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply