Petitioner invoked arbitration over a defaulted loan under a Master Loan Agreement containing an arbitration clause. After deeming respondents served via email and WhatsApp per agreement contacts, the court appointed a sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes, with proceedings under DIAC rules.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~O-3
MONEYWISE FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT LTD
.....Petitioner Through: Ms. Mevish Khan, Mr. Aman Choudhary and Ms. Arunima Singh, Adv.
versus
SH RAKSHIT ASHWINBHAI PATEL AND ANR .....Respondents Through: None. CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV O R D E R % 04.02.2025
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 10/02/2025 at 14:48:40
2687) , wherein, this Court permitted the service of the petition by email and WhatsApp. The Court held as follows:
“ 7. It is nonetheless clear that the respondents have been duly served by email and WhatsApp . It may be noted that the email address and the mobile number of the respondents is mentioned in the Agreement itself [at page Nos. 35, 37, 40 and 43 of the petition]. The affidavit of service dated 28.03.2024, affirmed by the authorised representative/legal counsel of the petitioner - company, demonstrates service by both these modes.
8. Although service by email and WhatsApp is sufficient, it may also be noted that in the Agreement itself, the address of the respondent for the purposes of correspondence, provided in Clause 10.3, is the address at which service has been attempted. The notice invoking arbitration sent to the same address was reported to have been delivered, but in the Speed Post report, by which the petition was sent to the address, it is stated that no such person is available at the address. ”
be complete.
"10.1 Arbitration
Any disputes, differences, controversies and questions directly or indirectly arising at any time hereafter between the Parties or their respective representatives or assigns, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement (or the subject matter of this Agreement), including, without limitation, any question regarding its existence, validity, interpretation, construction, performance, enforcement, rights and liabilities of the Parties, or termination ("Dispute") shall be referred to a sole arbitrator duly appointed by the Lender. The language of the arbitration shall be English. The seat of the arbitration shall be at New Delhi and the language of proceedings shall be English. The award rendered shall be in writing and shall set out the reasons for the arbitrator's decision. The costs and expenses of the arbitration shall be borne equally by each Party, with each Party paying for its own fees and costs including attorney fees, except as may be determined by the arbitration tribunal. Any award by the arbitration tribunal shall be final and binding."
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 10/02/2025 at 14:48:40
disbursed to the principal borrower in terms of the Master Loan Agreement dated 15.10.2018, executed between both parties with several terms and conditions. According to the petitioner, the respondents defaulted in the repayment of the loan amount, and thereafter, on 09.10.2024, the petitioner served a notice u/s 21 of the 1996 Act to respondents at the last known and correct address of respondents, for invoking arbitration and an amicable settlement of the disputes. According to the petitioner, the respondents are liable to pay an outstanding amount of Rs.13,10,881.59/- along with pendente lite and future interest.
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 10/02/2025 at 14:48:40
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J
FEBRUARY 4, 2025/DPA/DP
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
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 10/02/2025 at 14:48:40
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11 given the arbitration clause in the Master Loan Agreement and service of notice on respondents.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Lease Plan India (P) Ltd. v. Rudraksh Pharma DistributorRelied on¶4
Lease Plan India (P) Ltd. v. Rudraksh Pharma Distributor (2024 SCC OnLine Del 2687) · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Moneywise Financial Services Pvt Ltd
Sh Rakshit Ashwinbhai Patel
Respondent No. 2
Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
