Disposed¶24

Tata Capital Limited v. Parvez Ahmed & Anr.

Delhi HC4 Mar 2025ARB.P./2122/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tata Capital Limited v. Parvez Ahmed & Anr.; ARB.P. 2122/2024; High Court of Delhi; Justice Anish Dayal; Section 11(6) Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996; appointment of arbitrator; Sole Arbitrator Ms. Shreya Mathur; Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) Rules; Fourth Schedule fee; Loan Agreement dated 12 August 2020; Clause 9 arbitration clause; place of arbitration Delhi; invocation notice 30 August 2024; deemed served; claim approx Rs. 23 lakhs; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Ms. Shreya Mathur, Advocate as Sole Arbitrator; arbitration proceedings under the aegis and Rules of DIAC; fee per the Fourth Schedule of the A&C Act as amended by DIAC Rules; parties to appear before DIAC (listing on 10th March 2025); petition disposed of with all pending applications, if any. ¶24

Tata Capital Limited Vs Parvez Ahmed & Anr. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether, pursuant to Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court should appoint an arbitrator for adjudication of the disputes between the parties arising out of the Loan Agreement dated 12th August 2020 (arbitration clause: Clause 9; place of arbitration Delhi per Annexure-I), given that the parties could not agree on the appointment.

¶9

Court's answer

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) and be conducted under the DIAC Rules, with the Sole Arbitrator's fee as per the Fourth Schedule of the A&C Act, as amended by the DIAC Rules.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioner's email of 20th February 2025 did not bounce back, the respondents are deemed served, although no one appeared on their behalf.

¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

S.11(6) A&C Act appointment petition - Tata Capital Limited v. Parvez Ahmed & Anr. (ARB.P. 2122/2024, High Court of Delhi, Justice Anish Dayal, 04.03.2025): disputes arise from a Loan Agreement dated 12th August 2020 whose arbitration clause is Clause 9, with Annexure-I recording the place of arbitration as Delhi and jurisdiction vesting with Courts at Delhi; arbitration was invoked by notice dated 30th August 2024, but the parties could not agree on an arbitrator. Though postal and Registry-email notices went unserved, respondents were deemed served because the petitioner's email of 20th February 2025 did not bounce, with none appearing for them; the claim is approximately Rs. 23 lakhs. The Court appointed Ms. Shreya Mathur, Advocate as Sole Arbitrator, directed that proceedings take place under the aegis of DIAC and under the DIAC Rules, fixed the fee per the Fourth Schedule of the A&C Act as amended by the DIAC Rules, and listed the matter before DIAC on 10th March 2025; the petition stood disposed of with all pending applications, if any.

¶1

$~3

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 2122/2024

¶4

TATA CAPITAL LIMITED .....Petitioner

¶5

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

¶6

versus

¶7

PARVEZ AHMED & ANR. .....Respondents Through: None

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL O R D E R % 04.03.2025

¶9

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 12^th August 2020 executed between the parties.

¶10

It is stated that the arbitration clause is Clause 9 of the said agreement as applicable to the parties herein. It is stated that Annexure-I to this agreement at Serial Nos. 13 and 14 records that the place of arbitration shall be ‘ Delhi’ and the jurisdiction shall vest with Courts at Delhi.

¶11

Since, there were disputes between the parties, the Petitioner invoked arbitration vide notice dated 30^th August 2024.

¶12

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

¶13

Counsel for the Petitioner states that Clause 9 has to be read with Annexure-1 of the above-mentioned agreement. He states that the place at which the arbitral proceedings have to be conducted has been specified as Delhi in the said Annexure-1 .

¶14

Pursuant to notice issued, service report as regards service through

¶15

This is a digitally signed order.

¶16

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 23:38:51

¶17

ordinary process is still awaited. Service report also notes that email sent by the Registry has remained unserved while notice sent via speed post remain unserved to both the respondents.

¶18

Affidavit of service has not been filed.

¶19

Counsel for petitioner states that they have sent an email on 20^th February 2025, which has not bounced back, as per instructions. Accordingly, respondents are deemed served. However, no one appears on behalf of respondents.

¶20

As per counsel for petitioner, the claim is in the range of about 23 lakhs.

¶21

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.

¶22

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] .

¶23

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.

¶24

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

¶25

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

¶26

ANISH DAYAL, J

¶27

MARCH 4, 2025/sm/na

¶28

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 23:38:51

Tata Capital Limited v. Parvez Ahmed & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tata Capital Limited v. Parvez Ahmed & 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.

Tata Capital Limited Vs Rishabh Aggarwal & Anr.

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