Authority: High Court at Calcutta

Order Date: 14 October 2026

Case Overview

  • Petition by Barasat Management Private Limited under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator for a dispute with respondents Niladri Moitra and others over alleged arrears of common‑area maintenance charges in the "Fortune Township" residential project.
  • Project details: 68,303.55 sq m, 21 towers, 650 flats, common areas exceeding 6 lakh sq ft, located at 49/2 Jessore Road (East), Kazipara, Barasat, Kolkata‑700125.
  • Respondents purchased Flat No. L‑04 under a registered deed of conveyance dated 19‑04‑2019, which incorporated by reference the deed of declaration dated 24‑04‑2010. Both documents contain an arbitration clause referring disputes to a sole arbitrator (Mr Naresh Balodia) or his nominee.
  • Maintenance charges were initially 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 total Rs 1,46,775; payments made Rs 37,269; interest claimed Rs 32,491; total amount claimed Rs 1,79,266 (excluding interim interest and interest on award).
  • Petition nominated Mr Abirlal Chakraborty as sole arbitrator on 08‑04‑2026; respondents objected to the nomination and raised a limitation defence, asserting the petitioner was not a party to the arbitration agreement.
  • Respondents argued the petitioner, not being a signatory to the 2019 conveyance or 2010 declaration, could not invoke the arbitration clause and relied on a separate 2017 Maintenance and Management Agreement containing its own arbitration clause.

Final Outcome

  • The Court held that a valid arbitration agreement exists in the deed of conveyance (19‑04‑2019) read with the deed of declaration (24‑04‑2010) and that respondents are bound by it.
  • Considering the petitioner’s role as the "Maintenance Body" under Clause 34 of the deed of declaration, its direct dealings with respondents, and the subject‑matter of the dispute (maintenance charges), the Court is prima facie satisfied that the petitioner is a veritable party to the arbitration agreement.
  • All contested factual issues, including the petitioner’s authority to levy charges and the limitation defence, are to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 16 of the Act.
  • The Court appointed Ms Srijani Ghosh, Advocate (Mob. 8910642648), as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes.
  • The arbitrator is directed to disclose any interest under Section 12(1), fix remuneration as per the Fourth Schedule of the Act, and decide all questions of arbitrability, jurisdiction, claim, counter‑claim, and limitation.
  • The petition is disposed of.

Topics: Arbitration; Real Estate Maintenance