Allowed

Schindler India Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S. Ncc Ltd.

Delhi HC29 Jan 2024ARB.P./1104/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, the Delhi High Court appointed Ms. Shobhana Takiar as the sole arbitrator to resolve disputes between Schindler India and NCC Ltd arising from a Work Order, after finding a valid arbitration agreement and jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Ms. Shobhana Takiar as sole arbitrator; matter referred to DIAC for arbitration proceedings.

Schindler India Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S. Ncc Ltd. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~3

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 1104/2023

¶4

SCHINDLER INDIA PVT LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Alok Tripathi, Advocate. versus

¶5

M/S. NCC LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Harish Pandey, Advocate.

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R % 29.01.2024

¶8

By way of the present petition under section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996 (‘A&C Act’), the petitioner seeks appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes that are stated to have arisen with the respondent from Work Order dated 18.05.2015 (‘Work Order’).

¶9

Notice on this petition was issued on 19.10.2023. Reply dated 09.01.2024 has been filed by the respondent.

¶10

Mr. Alok Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this court to the Work Order which comprises the arbitration agreement; and contemplates reference of disputes between the parties to arbitration in accordance with the A&C Act.

¶11

As per the record, the petitioner invoked arbitration vide Notice dated 13.09.2023, to which the respondent has not sent any reply.

¶12

Upon a conspectus of the averments contained in the petition, the stand taken by the respondent, and the submissions made, this court is satisfied that there is a valid and subsisting arbitration agreement

¶13

ARB.P. 1104/2023 Page 1 of 3

¶14

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 00:23:09

¶15

between the parties; that this court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present petition; and also that the disputes that are stated to have arisen between the parties, as set-out inter-alia in invocation notice dated 13.09.2023, do not appear ex-facie to be non-arbitrable.

¶16

In view of the above, at this stage, learned counsel for the parties jointly request that this court may appoint an arbitrator; and then refer the matter for arbitration under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, New Delhi (‘DIAC’), keeping all their respective factual and legal contentions open.

¶17

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and Ms. Shobhana Takiar, Advocate (Cellphone No.: +919810962950 ) is appointed as the learned Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties; with arbitration proceedings to be conducted under the aegis of the DIAC, in accordance with applicable rules.

¶18

The learned Sole Arbitrator would furnish to the parties requisite disclosures as required under section 12 of the A&C Act; and in the event there is any impediment to the appointment on that count, the parties are given liberty to file an appropriate application in this court.

¶19

The learned Arbitrator shall then proceed with the arbitral proceedings in accordance with the rules and regulations of DIAC; and subject to arbitrator’s fee and arbitration costs, as may be applicable.

¶20

All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the claims/counter-claims are kept open, to be decided by the learned Sole Arbitrator on merits, in accordance with law.

¶21

ARB.P. 1104/2023 Page 2 of 3

¶22

¶23

A copy of this order be communicated forthwith to the Co-ordinator, DIAC, for information and compliance.

¶24

A copy of this order be sent by e-mail to the learned Sole Arbitrator, as also to learned counsel for the parties.

¶25

The petition stands disposed-of in the above terms.

¶26

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed-of.

¶27

ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J

¶28

JANUARY 29, 2024

¶29

V. Rawat

¶30

ARB.P. 1104/2023 Page 3 of 3

¶31

Schindler India Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S. Ncc Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Schindler India Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S. Ncc Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Divyashakti Associates Private Limited Vs Keshav Lal Dua & Anr.

M/S Fortune Talkies Pvt. Ltd. Vs Naseem Ahmed

M/S Primatel Fibcom Limited Vs Iti Limited

Cholamandalam Investment Finance Company Limited Vs M/S S.S Tours India & Ors.

Ranjit Construction Company Vs Gujrat State Road and Building Deprtment & Ors.

Innovision Limited Vs Hpcl-Mittal Energy Limited