Tata Capital Limited v. Rishabh Aggarwal & Anr.

Delhi HC4 Mar 2025ARB.P./2119/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

ARB.P. 2119/2024, Delhi High Court, Anish Dayal J, order dated 04.03.2025. Keywords: appointment of arbitrator; Section 11(6) Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996; sole arbitrator; Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC); DIAC Rules; Fourth Schedule fee; deemed service by email; respondents shifted address; loan agreement dated 23 May 2023; Clause 9 arbitration clause; Annexure-I Delhi seat and jurisdiction; arbitration invoked 24 July 2024; claim about 27 lakhs; Tata Capital Limited v Rishabh Aggarwal & Anr.; petition disposed with pending applications.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Ms. Shreya Mathur, Advocate as Sole Arbitrator; arbitration to proceed under the aegis of DIAC per the DIAC Rules; fee per the Fourth Schedule of the A&C Act as amended by the DIAC Rules; matter listed before DIAC on 10th March 2025.

Tata Capital Limited Vs Rishabh Aggarwal & Anr. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether an Arbitrator ought to be appointed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for adjudication of disputes between Tata Capital Limited and Rishabh Aggarwal & Anr. arising out of the Loan Agreement dated 23rd May 2023, having regard to the arbitration agreement in Clause 9 read with Annexure-I (place of arbitration: Delhi).

¶¶12

Court's answer

The Court appointed Ms. Shreya Mathur, Advocate (Mobile No. 8527080105) as Sole Arbitrator; arbitration proceedings to take place under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) and under the Rules of the DIAC, with the Sole Arbitrator's fee as per the Fourth Schedule of the A&C Act as amended by the DIAC Rules.

¶¶23

Ratio / Principle

Respondent nos. 1 and 2 were deemed served in view of successful service through the email IDs recorded on the loan application form, notwithstanding the speed-post tracking report noting that the respondents had shifted from the said address.

¶¶21

Key takeaways

The petition was disposed of together with all pending applications, if any; the matter was listed before the DIAC on 10th March 2025.ratio¶¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Anish Dayal, J) disposed of an ARB.P. (Section 11(6), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996) petition by Tata Capital Limited seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for disputes under a Loan Agreement dated 23rd May 2023, whose arbitration agreement sits in Clause 9 read with Annexure-I (Serial Nos. 13 and 14 fixing the place of arbitration as Delhi and jurisdiction with Courts at Delhi). Having invoked arbitration by notice dated 24th July 2024 and with the parties unable to agree on an Arbitrator, and upon deeming respondent nos. 1 and 2 served through the email IDs on the loan application form (speed-post tracking showed the respondents had shifted address), the Court appointed Ms. Shreya Mathur, Advocate as Sole Arbitrator, directed that proceedings be conducted under the aegis and Rules of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC), with fees per the Fourth Schedule of the A&C Act as amended by the DIAC Rules, listed the matter before the DIAC on 10th March 2025, and disposed of the petition with all pending applications; the stated claim was approximately Rs. 27 lakhs.

¶1

$~2

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 2119/2024

¶4

TATA CAPITAL LIMITED .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Varun Bedi, Mr. Dev Gulati and Ms. Swati Ahalawat Advs

¶6

versus

¶7

RISHABH AGGARWAL & ANR. .....Respondents Through: None

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 04.03.2025

¶12

This is a petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘ A&C Act ’) seeking appointment of the Arbitrator for the adjudication of disputes between the parties arising out of the Loan Agreement dated 23^rd May 2023 executed between the parties.

¶13

It is stated that the arbitration agreement is recorded in Clause 9 of the said agreement as applicable to the parties herein. It is stated that Annexure-I to this agreement at Serial No. 13 and 14 records that the place of arbitration shall be ‘ Delhi ’ and the jurisdiction shall vest with Courts at Delhi.

¶14

Since, there were disputes between the parties, the petitioner invoked arbitration vide notice dated 24^th July 2024.

¶15

It is stated that despite petitioner's request, the parties could not agree to appointment of the Arbitrator as per the aforementioned Clause.

¶16

Counsel for the petitioner states that Clause 9 has to be read with Annexure-I of the above-mentioned agreement. He states that the place at which the arbitral proceedings have to be conducted, has been specified as

¶17

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 30/06/2025 at 23:38:55

¶18

‘ Delhi ’, in the said Annexure-I .

¶19

As per the service report, email sent by Registry as also by the counsel for petitioner have not bounced back.

¶20

Tracking report of speed post however, notes that respondents have shifted from the said address.

¶21

Considering successful service through email IDs of respondents on the loan application form, respondent nos. 1 and 2 are deemed to have been served. However, no one is present on their behalf, despite service.

¶22

As per counsel for petitioner, the claim is in the range of about 27 lakhs.

¶23

Accordingly, Ms. Shreya Mathur, Advocate (Mobile No. 8527080105) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator. The Arbitration proceedings shall take place under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (‘ DIAC ’). The arbitration proceedings shall be conducted under the Rules of the DIAC. The fee of the Sole Arbitrator shall be as per the Fourth Schedule of the A&C Act, as amended by the DIAC Rules.

¶24

List before the DIAC on 10^th March 2025. Let a copy of the present order be emailed to Secretary, DIAC on the email [email protected] .

¶25

Copy of this order be communicated by the Registry to the Respondent through email. Parties to appear before the DIAC, which shall also issue notice to the counsel for the respondent once again.

¶26

Petition is disposed of with all pending applications, if any.

¶27

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

¶28

ANISH DAYAL, J

¶29

MARCH 4, 2025/sm/na

¶30

Tata Capital Limited v. Rishabh Aggarwal & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tata Capital Limited v. Rishabh Aggarwal & 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

Ccl K Vs State NCT of Delhi

M/S Essel Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Vs Smt Kamla Devi and Ors.

Sar Parkash Mehra Vs Rattan Bahadur Malhotra & Ors.

Chaitanya Energy Private Limited Vs Santoshi Hyvolt Electricals Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Sophisticated Industrial Material Analytic Labs Pvt. Ltd. Vs Steel Authority of India Ltd.

Tata Capital Limited Vs Parvez Ahmed & Anr.