Disposed

M/S Devinder Dahiya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. Public Works Department

Delhi HC10 Dec 2025ARB.P./1772/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Section 11(6) seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator for disputes over unpaid dues under a PWD construction contract. Respondent did not dispute the arbitration clause. Court appointed Mr. MCT Pareva as sole arbitrator, with proceedings under DIAC, and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Mr. MCT Pareva, ADG CPWD, as Sole Arbitrator; proceedings to be conducted under DIAC rules.

M/S Devinder Dahiya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs Public Works… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~6

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 1772/2025

¶4

M/S DEVINDER DAHIYA INFRASTRUCTURE

¶5

PVT. LTD .....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. Sumit Kalra, Ms. Yashika Malhotra and Mr. Hari Arora, Advocates

¶7

versus

¶8

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT .....Respondent Through: Mr. Anubhav Gupta, Advocate.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

¶10

O R D E R % 10.12.2025

¶11

This 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 Agreement No. 23/EE/Edu.Maint.Div.(South)/PWD/2018-19 (hereinafter ‘Agreement’).

¶12

The petitioner was awarded a contract for ‘construction of additional classrooms at SBV Yogi Arvind, GGSSS Tigri, GGSSS No 2 Sector-5 Ambedkar Nagar, Ishani G-Block Saket, SKV MB Road Pushp Vihar, New Delhi ’.

¶13

Since there were disputes between the parties on account of nonpayment of the outstanding dues by the respondent, the petitioner sent several notices to the respondent including the notice dated 7^th April 2025,

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

ARB.P. 1772/2025

¶16

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 15/12/2025 at 11:14:29

¶17

invoking the aforesaid arbitration clause under Section 21 of the Act. However, the respondent has failed to respond to the said notices.

¶18

Hence, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court by way of the present petition.

¶19

Notice was issued in the petition on 27^th October, 2025 and two weeks’ time was granted to the respondent to file a reply.

¶20

Counsel appears on behalf of the respondent and does not dispute the existence of the Arbitration Clause.

¶21

Counsel for the parties submit that the aforesaid Agreement contains an arbitration clause, i.e. Clause 25. It is submitted that as per the mandate of arbitration Clause 25(2) of the GCC as modified, Arbitrator must be a graduate Engineer with experience in handling public works engineering contracts at the level not lower than Chief Engineer (Joint Secretary Level, Government of India).

¶22

I am satisfied that there exists an Arbitration Agreement and there are disputes which need to be adjudicated through an arbitral mechanism. 9. Accordingly, the dispute between the parties under the Agreement is referred to the Arbitral Tribunal comprising a Sole Arbitrator. The following directions are issued in this regard:

¶23

a. Mr. MCT Pareva, ADG, CPWD (Mobile No.: +91-9910337676) is appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

¶24

b. The arbitral proceedings shall be held under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road, New Delhi (hereinafter ‘DIAC’).

¶25

c. The remuneration of the Arbitrator shall be in terms of DIAC

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

ARB.P. 1772/2025

¶28

¶29

(Administrative Cost and Arbitrators’ Fees) Rules, 2018.

¶30

d. 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.

¶31

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

¶32

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 objections including limitation as well as claims on merits of the dispute of either of the parties, are left open for adjudication by the Arbitrator.

¶33

The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶34

All pending applications stand disposed of.

¶35

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

¶36

AMIT BANSAL, J

¶37

DECEMBER 10, 2025

¶38

Vivek/-

¶39

Page 3 of 3

¶40

ARB.P. 1772/2025

¶41

M/S Devinder Dahiya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. Public Works Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Devinder Dahiya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. Public Works Department

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

M/S Gurgaon Infospace Limited Vs M/S Vultureculture Pub House LLP

Barista Coffee Company Limited Vs M/S Mayal Enterprises & Anr.

Tata Capital Limited Vs Onus International & Anr.

M/S Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs A2Z Mobile Gallery through Its Proprietor and Ors.

Smt Ruby Thukral & Anr. Vs Sh Ajay Arora

Vinod Rajoria Vs Mohinder Kumar Verma