Allowed

C15 Mri Imaging and Diagnostic Research Centre Ltd. v. Directorate Medical, Delhi through Its Director and Anr.

Delhi HC1 Jul 2024ARB.P./870/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed and disposed of a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of a Sole Arbitrator. Respondents accepted notice and had no objection. The Court appointed Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh as Sole Arbitrator under DIAC.

What did the court decide?

Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh appointed as Sole Arbitrator; parties to approach him within two weeks; arbitration under DIAC.

C15 Mri Imaging and Diagnostic Research Centre Ltd. Vs Directorate… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~11

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 870/2024

¶4

C15 MRI IMAGING AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH CENTRE LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Divij Soni, Adv. versus

¶5

DIRECTORATE MEDICAL, DELHI THROUGH: ITS DIRECTOR AND ANR ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Sonam Anand, Mr. Yakesh Anand, Ms. SL Soujanya, Advs.

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH O R D E R

¶8

% 01.07.2024

¶9

I.A. 31858/2024

¶10

Exemption is granted subject to all just exceptions.

¶11

The petitioner shall file legible and clearer copies of exempted documents, compliant with practice rules before the next date of hearing.

¶12

The application is disposed of.

¶13

ARB.P. 870/2024

¶14

This is a petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

¶15

The arbitration clause is clause 12 of the MoU dated 18.01.2017.

¶16

The petitioner invoked arbitration clause vide legal notice dated 09.12.2023.

¶17

For the said reasons, issue notice.

¶18

Ms. Anand, learned counsel for the respondents accepts notice and has no objection to the appointment of the Sole Arbitrator.

¶19

For the said reasons and in view of the statement of Ms. Anand,

¶20

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 01/07/2025 at 23:51:44

¶21

learned counsel for the respondents, the petition is allowed and disposed of with the following directions:

¶22

i) Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh (Adv.) (Mob. No. 9868632122) is appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

¶23

ii) The arbitration will be held under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road, New Delhi hereinafter, referred to as the ‘DIAC’). The remuneration of the learned Arbitrator shall be in terms of the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶24

iii) The learned Arbitrator is requested to furnish a declaration in terms of Section 12 of the Act prior to entering into the reference.

¶25

iv) It is made clear that all the rights and contentions of the parties, including as to the arbitrability of any of the claim, any other preliminary objection, as well as claims on merits of the dispute of either of the parties, are left open for adjudication by the learned arbitrator.

¶26

v) The parties shall approach the learned Arbitrator within two weeks from today.

¶27

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶28

JULY 1, 2024/DM Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶29

This is a digitally signed order.

¶30

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 01/07/2025 at 23:51:44

C15 Mri Imaging and Diagnostic Research Centre Ltd. v. Directorate Medical, Delhi through Its Director and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C15 Mri Imaging and Diagnostic Research Centre Ltd. v. Directorate Medical, Delhi through Its Director and Anr.

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

Omaxe Ltd. Vs Himland Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. .

National Highway Authority of India Vs M S Pnc Kanpur Highways Limited

Vistar Interior LLP Vs Indian City Properties Ltd.

Gold Plus Glass Industries Limited Vs Gail (India) Limited

Shillong Expressway Private Limited Vs National Highways Authority of India

NTPC Ltd. Vs Coastal Projects Pvt.Ltd