10 June 2024 Arbitration >> Corporate Law   |   Property/Real Estate Law >> Property & Real Estate  

Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition filed by an investor seeking to restrain a developer from selling three office spaces. The dispute arose from an agreement to sell the properties and an unsigned Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) promising assured returns.

Background:

The investor had entered into an agreement to purchase three office spaces from the developer and paid a part of the consideration. Additionally, the investor claimed negotiations for an MoU guaranteeing a specific return on investment. However, the MoU was never signed. The investor approached the court seeking an injunction to prevent the developer from selling the office spaces. They also demanded execution of conveyance deeds for the properties and enforcement of the assured returns promised in the unsigned MoU. The developer countered that the investor had previously requested a cancellation of the allotments and a refund of the invested amount. The developer argued that they had refunded the principal amount, fulfilling the investor's initial request.

Conclusion:

The court, after examining the evidence, including email exchanges between the parties, concluded that the investor was not entitled to both cancellation and conveyance. Since the MoU was never signed, the court held that no assured returns were due. As the investor had already received the principal amount invested, the court found no basis for granting an injunction to restrain the sale. The court clarified that its observations did not constitute a final judgment on the merits of the case. Both parties retain the right to present their arguments in the ongoing arbitration proceedings likely to address the remaining financial claims, such as interest or damages.

  Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996