The HC allowed the petitioner's application, holding that the...

The HC allowed the petitioner's application, holding that the question of entitlement to specific performance or refund under the contract, including claims arising from the respondents' failure to deliver flats and parking spaces, falls within the jurisdiction of the learned Arbitrator. The court found the dispute not to be ex facie time-barred or barred by limitation, emphasizing that construction contracts do not generally regard time as the essence. The petitioner's claim for refund and penalty, as acknowledged by the respondents in a December 15, 2020 letter, was held to potentially give rise to a fresh cause of action. The HC declined to dismiss the petition solely on the basis of an earlier alleged default date, directing that the Arbitrator consider the arbitrability, limitation, and admissibility of the claims, and provide the petitioner an opportunity to present evidence. The application was accordingly allowed.