AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
All these applications are connected and arise out of the same parties with reference to the same disputes that are to be referred to the Arbitrator and as such, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.
It can be seen that there is an arbitration clause between the parties and the applicant has already filed a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in Arb.O.P. (Com.Div.) No.ATN20250016134 C202600006 and the learned counsel for the applicant would submit that they are in the process of numbering the said petition and bringing it before the appropriate Court.
In the meanwhile, the grievance of the applicant is that there is a franchise agreement between the applicant and the respondent. While so, it is sought to be illegally terminated and the applicant apprehends that there are dues to the tune of Rs.1,00,00,000/-. Therefore, in order to safeguard their interests, O.A. No.373 of 2026 has been filed for an interim injunction restraining the respondent, its directors, officers, or any person claiming through them, from in any manner removing, dismantling, detaching, taking away, appropriating, converting, pledging, encumbering, alienating or otherwise dealing or interfering with the assets, kitchen equipment, machinery, furniture, tables, chairs, counters, shelving, fixtures, and fittings (both fixed and movable), CCTV cameras, surveillance infrastructure, branding elements, signage, billing systems and POS devices etc.
It can be seen that an ad-interim injunction is also granted in the said application.
O.A. No.374 of 2026 is filed for an injunction restraining the respondent from in any manner terminating the Franchise Agreement dated 11.12.2025.
The learned counsel for the respondent has filed a counter affidavit and submits that the respondent has no intention in carrying out the dismantling or taking away the above articles.
Arb.Appln. No.949 of 2026 is filed to direct the respondent to discharge and pay all outstanding rental dues under the rental agreement dated 11.12.2025 for all months, including January 2026, February 2026 and March 2026, so as to prevent the forfeiture, termination or repossession of the cafe premises by Nomads and to provide proof of such payment.
Arb.Appln. No.950 of 2026 is filed with a prayer directing the respondent to take all necessary, effective and expeditious steps to complete all pending civil works, interior fit-outs kitchen setup and other installations at the cafe premises and to render the franchise outlet fully operational.
Arb.Appln. No.951 of 2026 is filed directing the respondent to prepare, certify and file before this Court a complete, accurate, and itemised inventory of all assets, equipment, furniture, fixtures and materials of whatsoever nature present at the cafe premises.
Arb.Appln. No.952 of 2026 is filed to appoint a Receiver to visit, inspect and take stock of all the assets, equipment, furniture, fixtures and materials currently present at the cafe premises and to prepare and file a comprehensive inventory thereof before this Court.
The learned counsel for the applicant would submit that while the interim injunction already granted may be made absolute, the other prayers, more specifically, the taking of an inventory by appointing a Receiver shall also be granted as the applicant’s interests have to be protected. The applicant has got nothing to do with the inter se dispute between the respondent and the third party/landlord and the applicant is only interested in its own claim and if the equipments are removed, dismantled or spirited away, even if the applicant gets an award for the balance due to the applicant, the applicant will be left high and dry and therefore, the learned counsel would submit that the balance of convenience is in favour of the applicant by ordering the prayers made in the interim application.
Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, by relying upon the counter affidavit filed would submit that as on date, the premises stands sealed and closed as the third party/landlord, with reference to a landlord/tenant dispute, has approached the Civil Court at Bengaluru and got an order of lock and seal, pursuant to which the entire premises is under lock and seal. The respondent does not intend to dismantle or take away any of the assets or kitchen equipment. The inventory cannot now be made in view of the lock and seal order. If only the premises is opened, then only any inventory can be taken. All the other prayers are to be made only before the Arbitrator. The learned counsel for the applicant is not correct in contending about the dues or that there was a default on the part of the respondent.
In response, the learned counsel for the applicant would produce the copy of an order of the concerned Court at Bengaluru, holding that the suit itself is settled out of Court.
I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the material records of the case.
As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the respondent, with reference to further completion of the civil works (Arb.Appln. No.950 of 2026) or with reference to the continuation of the Franchise Agreement (O.A. No.374 of 2026) or with reference to all outstanding rental dues (Arb.Appln. No.949 of 2026), it can be seen that no orders can be passed at this stage and the parties can be relegated for filing such applications as and when the Arbitrator is appointed, if necessary, under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or else to await the final award of the Arbitrator.
With reference to the prayer made in O.A. No.373 of 2026, an ad-interim injunction has already been granted. The learned counsel for the respondent also submits that they are not intending to directly or indirectly remove, dismantle, detach or take away the equipment as mentioned in the prayer.
In view thereof, recording the submissions made and further restraining the respondent from in any manner, directly or indirectly, removing, dismantling, detaching, taking away, appropriating, converting, pledging, encumbering, alienating or otherwise dealing with or interfering with the assets, kitchen equipments, machinery, furniture, tables, chairs, counters, shelving, fixtures, and fittings (both fixed and movable), CCTV cameras, surveillance infrastructure, branding elements, signage, billing equipment and POS devices etc., O.A. No.373 of 2026 stands ordered.
With reference to the prayers made in Arb.Appln. Nos.951 and 952 of 2026, the prayers overlap. The prayer in Arb.Appln. No.951 of 2026 is to direct the respondent himself to prepare an inventory and the prayer in Arb.Appln. No.952 of 2026 is to appoint a Receiver to prepare an inventory.
It is now stated that the order of lock and seal passed by the Civil Court is no more there and Receiver or Commissioner can enter into the premises.
In view thereof, the applicant himself or any representatives and a representative of the respondent shall jointly take an inventory of the available equipment, assets, and all things inside the premises. Photographs and videographs shall also be taken and the parties shall jointly prepare a memo of inventory and the same shall be filed before the Arbitrator to be appointed in the petition filed by the applicant. Accordingly, Arb.Appln. Nos.951 and 952 of 2026 stand disposed of.