Authority: Calcutta High Court

Order Date: 14 October 2026

Case Overview

  • Petition filed by Barasat Management Private Limited (Petitioner) under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator against Respondents Kamal Kumar Chowdhury and others (flat owners) for alleged arrears of common area maintenance (CAM) charges.
  • The dispute arises from the “Fortune Township” project at 49/2 Jessore Road (East), Kazipara, Barasat, Kolkata‑700125, comprising 68,303.55 sq m, 21 towers, 650 flats and >6 lakh sq ft of common areas.
  • Respondents purchased Flat No. C‑209 under a registered deed of conveyance dated 29‑04‑2010, which incorporated by reference the deed of declaration dated 24‑04‑2010. Both documents contain an arbitration clause referring disputes to sole arbitrator Mr Naresh Balodia or a nominee.
  • Barasat Management was formed by the developer (proforma respondent) under Clause 34 of the deed of declaration as the “Maintenance Body”. It entered into a separate Maintenance and Management Agreement with the developer on 08‑03‑2017 and has been providing maintenance services since 01‑04‑2017.
  • Maintenance charges were fixed at Rs 1.50 per sq ft, revised to Rs 2.00 per sq ft from 01‑11‑2017 and to Rs 2.50 per sq ft from 01‑04‑2022. Bills for the period 01‑04‑2024 to 31‑03‑2026 totalled Rs 1,13,209, of which Respondents paid Rs 36,701, leaving a principal outstanding of Rs 76,508. Interest at 18 % per annum amounted to Rs 14,415, bringing the total claimed amount to Rs 90,923 (the petition also mentions Rs 1,79,266 in another paragraph).
  • The petitioner nominated Mr Abirlal Chakraborty as sole arbitrator on 08‑04‑2026; Respondents rejected the nomination on 23‑04‑2026, objecting to unilateral appointment and raising limitation objections.

Final Outcome

  • The Court held that a valid arbitration agreement exists in the deed of conveyance and declaration, and that Barasat Management is prima‑facie a “veritable party” to that agreement based on its role as the Maintenance Body, its direct dealings with the flat owners, and the subject‑matter of the dispute.
  • The claim is not time‑barred; the Court declined to conduct a mini‑trial on factual disputes at the Section 11 stage.
  • Ms Srijani Ghosh, Advocate (Mob. 8910642648), is appointed as the sole arbitrator. She must make disclosures under Section 12(1) and fix her remuneration per the Fourth Schedule or as agreed.
  • All questions of arbitrability, limitation, jurisdiction, claim, counter‑claim, and merits are left to the arbitrator. The petition is disposed.

Topics: Arbitration, Real Estate Maintenance, Legal Dispute