Disposed

Ms Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Ms Sareens Electronics & Ors.

Delhi HC20 Mar 2025ARB.P./41/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Loan agreement dispute with an arbitration clause; borrower and co-borrower defaulted and were served by email but did not appear. The court allowed the Section 11 petition, appointing a sole arbitrator to adjudicate under DIAC auspices, leaving all rights and contentions open.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; Ms. Vrinda Kapoor appointed sole arbitrator under DIAC rules; parties to approach arbitrator within two weeks.

Ms Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ms Sareens… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~12

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

ARB.P. 41/2025

¶4

MS MONEYWISE FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD. ...Petitioner Through: Ms. Mehvish Khan, Mr. Aman Choudhary, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

MS SAREENS ELECTRONICS & ORS. .....Respondents Through:

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH O R D E R % 20.03.2025

¶9

This is a petition filed under Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for adjudication of disputes between the parties.

¶10

The petitioner by way of a Loan Agreement dated 31.01.2022, sanctioned a loan for a sum of Rs. 21,17,742 to the respondents. The respondent No. 1 is a proprietorship firm who is the borrower through its proprietor concern of Ms. Meenakshi Sareen and respondent No. 2 is the coborrower.

¶11

The said Agreement contained arbitration clause being Clause 8.2 which reads as under:

¶12

“8.2. 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

¶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 28/03/2025 at 12:21:20

¶15

limitation, any question regarding its existence, validity, interpretation, construction, performance, enforcement, rights and liabilities of the Parties, or termination ("Dispute") thereof shall be finally settled by arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as amended ("Arbitration Act"). The Dispute shall be referred to a sole arbitrator duly appointed by the Parties with mutual consent failing which the sole arbitrator shall be appointed in accordance with the Arbitration Act. The language of the arbitration shall be English. The seat of the arbitration shall be at 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.”

¶16

Subsequently, the respondents started defaulting in the payment. Hence, the petitioner issued Loan Recall Notice dated 29.06.2024 and thereafter, notice invoking arbitration clause dated 16.10.2024.

¶17

The e-mail ID of the respondents in the Loan Agreement is ‘[email protected]’. As per the affidavit of service, the respondents have been served on the said e-maid ID. 6. Despite service, there is nobody appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶18

I am satisfied that the respondents have been duly served but despite

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

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 28/03/2025 at 12:21:20

¶21

service, there is nobody appearing for the respondents.

¶22

Since there are disputes pending between the parties, the petition is allowed with the following directions:

¶23

i) Ms. Vrinda Kapoor, Adv. (Mob. No. 9899029387) is appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

¶24

ii) The arbitration will be held under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road, New Delhi (hereinafter, referred to as the ‘DIAC’).

¶25

iii) The remuneration of the learned Arbitrator shall be in terms of DIAC (Administrative Cost and Arbitrators’ Fees) Rules, 2018.

¶26

iv) The learned Arbitrator is requested to furnish a declaration in terms of Section 12 of the Act prior to entering into the reference.

¶27

v) It is made clear that all the rights and contentions of the parties, including as to the arbitrability of any of the claim, any other preliminary objection, as well as claims/counter-claims and merits of the dispute of either of the parties, are left open for adjudication by the learned arbitrator.

¶28

vi) The parties shall approach the learned Arbitrator within two weeks from today.

¶29

The present petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶30

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶31

MARCH 20, 2025/DM

¶32

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶33

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 28/03/2025 at 12:21:20

Ms Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Ms Sareens Electronics & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Ms Sareens Electronics & Ors.

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. Vermas Beauty Parlour Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S. Procapitus Business Park Pvt. Ltd.

M/S Bilaspur Pathrapali Road Pvt. Ltd. Vs National Highways Authority of India

NTPC Limited Vs Aadhar Stumbh Township Pvt. Ltd.

Sportina Payce Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs Delhi Development Authority

M/S Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Manish Hosiery and Ors.

Ms Shumita Kakkar Vs United for Her Private Limited & Ors.