In Brief
A tenant under a tenancy agreement with an arbitration clause challenged arbitration proceedings for eviction after the lease expired by efflux of time. The respondent landlord sought appointment of an arbitrator, which the High Court granted. The tenant argued that landlord-tenant disputes under the Transfer of Property Act are non-arbitrable, relying on Himangni Enterprises v. Kamaljeet Singh Ahluwalia. The Supreme Court held that the Transfer of Property Act is silent on arbitrability and does not negate it. Sections 114 and 114A balance both parties' rights and do not exclude arbitration by necessary implication. The Court doubted the reasoning in Himangni Enterprises and referred the matter to a three-judge Bench for reconsideration, allowing the arbitration to proceed pending final determination.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.