M/S Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mr. Raj Kumar Singh, Proprietor of Kumar Printing and Textiles and Anr.

The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter ‘Act’) seeking appointment of a Sole Arbitrator for the adjudication of the disputes between the parties arising out of a Loan Agreement dated 23^rd January, 2025 entered into between the petitioner and the respondents.

¶10

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid Agreement contains an arbitration clause, i.e. Clause 8.2, which provides for adjudication of any dispute arising between the parties by way of arbitration. For ease of reference, Clause 8.2 of the Agreement is set out below:-

¶11

Page 1 of 3

¶12

ARB.P. 1591/2025

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

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 15/11/2025 at 11:59:35

¶15

He further submits that since the respondents failed to repay the loan amount, the petitioner issued a notice dated 24^th July, 2025 to the respondents invoking the aforesaid arbitration clause in terms of Section 21 of the Act. However, the respondents failed to respond to the aforesaid notice.

¶16

Notice in the petition was issued on 25^th September, 2025 and two weeks’ time was given to the respondents to file reply.

¶17

As per the report of the Registry, the respondents have been served through e-mail.

¶18

None appears on behalf of the respondents despite service.

¶19

Accordingly, the disputes between the parties are referred to the Arbitral Tribunal comprising a Sole Arbitrator.

¶20

Mr. Sudeep Dey, Advocate (Mob. No. +91-9205541539) is appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

¶21

The following directions are issued in this regard:

¶22

a. The Arbitrator is requested to furnish a declaration in terms of Section 12 of the Act prior to entering into the reference. In the event there is any impediment to the Arbitrator’s appointment on that count, the parties are given liberty to file an appropriate application before this Court.

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

ARB.P. 1591/2025

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

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 15/11/2025 at 11:59:35

¶27

b. The remuneration of the Arbitrator shall be in terms of Schedule IV of the Act.

¶28

c. The parties shall approach the Arbitrator within two (2) weeks from today.

¶29

d. It is made clear that all the rights and contentions of the parties, including the arbitrability of any of the claims and/or counter claims, 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 Sole Arbitrator.

¶30

The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶31

Needless to state, nothing in this order shall be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case.

¶32

AMIT BANSAL, J

¶33

NOVEMBER 12, 2025

Vivek/-

Page 3 of 3

ARB.P. 1591/2025

This is a digitally signed order.

¶38

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 15/11/2025 at 11:59:35

M/S Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Mr. Raj Kumar Singh, Proprietor of Kumar Printing and Textiles and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Mr. Raj Kumar Singh, Proprietor of Kumar Printing and Textiles and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jpfl Films Private Limited Vs Ms. Mrinalini Singh

Parshva Innovation Vs Arcis Clean Energy Pvt. Ltd.

Dhani Loans and Services Ltd. Vs Jaswinder Singh Kohli Proprietor of Sony Enterprises & Ors.

M/S Kwality Township Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Apex Township Pvt. Ltd.

Mohinder Agrawal Vs Avadesh Garg and Ors.

Babita Vs Vikas Drall & Ors.