Lantern Digital Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dadu Medical Centre Pvt. Ltd. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

Lantern Digital Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dadu Medical Centre Pvt. Ltd. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Mandate of the Arbitrator terminated; Chairperson of the DIAC directed to appoint a substitute Arbitrator, who shall resume proceedings from the stage at which they were left and give disclosure under Section 12 of the 1996 Act before entering upon the reference.

Issue for consideration

Whether the mandate of the Arbitrator (appointed by this Court on 08.04.2025 by consent) should be terminated and a substitute Arbitrator appointed, in view of his elevation as a Judge of the High Court.

Court's answer

The petition is disposed of by terminating the mandate of the Arbitrator and directing the Chairperson of the DIAC to appoint a substitute Arbitrator, in light of Rule 11 of the DIAC (Arbitration and Procedural Rules), 2023 which provides that on substitution the Arbitrator will be appointed by the Chairperson of DIAC.

Ratio / Principle

The substitute Arbitrator shall resume proceedings from the stage at which the proceedings were left by the erstwhile Arbitrator.

Key takeaways

The Arbitrator on appointment shall give disclosure under Section 12 of the 1996 Act before entering upon the reference.ratio¶18
The Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and all rights and contentions of the respective parties are left open.obiter¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Substitution of Arbitrator — Arbitrator appointed by the Court on 08.04.2025 by consent of parties in a Section 9 petition (OMP.(I)(COMM.) 123/2025) elevated as a Judge of the High Court — Petition for substitution disposed of by terminating the mandate of the Arbitrator and directing the Chairperson, DIAC to appoint a substitute Arbitrator, having regard to Rule 11 of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (Arbitration and Procedural Rules), 2023 — Substitute Arbitrator to resume proceedings from the stage at which they were left by the erstwhile Arbitrator and to give disclosure under Section 12 of the 1996 Act before entering upon reference — No opinion expressed on merits; all rights and contentions of parties left open.

$~55

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 102/2025

LANTERN DIGITAL SERVICES PVT LTD .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Arun Batta and Mr. Rohan Sharma, Advocates.

versus

DADU MEDICAL CENTRE PVT LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Shivek Trehan and Mr. Ishaan Kumar, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

O R D E R % 10.10.2025

This petition is filed by the Petitioner for substitution of the Arbitrator on the ground that learned Arbitrator appointed by this Court on 08.04.2025 by consent of parties under a petition filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘1996 Act’) being OMP. (I) (COMM.) 123/2025 has been elevated as a Judge of the High Court.

Learned counsel for the Respondent has no objection to the substitution. He, however, draws the attention of the Court to Rule 11 of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (Arbitration and Procedural Rules), 2023 which provides that in case of any substitution, the Arbitrator will be appointed by the Chairperson of DIAC. In light of this, this petition is disposed of terminating the mandate of the Arbitrator and directing the Chairperson of the DIAC to appoint a substitute Arbitrator. The substitute

O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 102/2025

Page 1 of 2

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 15/10/2025 at 12:14:18

Arbitrator shall resume proceedings from the stage at which the proceedings were left by the erstwhile Arbitrator.

Learned Arbitrator on appointment shall give disclosure under Section 12 of the 1996 Act before entering upon reference.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and all rights and contentions of the respective parties are left open.

Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

JYOTI SINGH, J

OCTOBER 10, 2025/ RW

O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 102/2025

Page 2 of 2

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 15/10/2025 at 12:14:18