M/S Glodyne People Power Ltd. & Ors. Vs M/S Caparo Financial… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

M/S Glodyne People Power Ltd. & Ors. Vs M/S Caparo Financial… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal allowed in effect: impugned order dated 23.02.2024 set aside; Section 34 objection petition restored to its original number and remitted to the learned Single Judge for decision in accordance with law; Parties and counsels directed to appear before the learned Single Judge on 13.01.2026; appeal and pending applications disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Appellants' objection petition under Section 34 of the Act could validly be dismissed by the learned Single Judge solely on the ground that the Appellants failed to pay the fee of the Sole Arbitrator. +1 more

Court's answer

On the joint concession of learned counsel for both Parties, recorded and accepted by this Court after argument, the objections under Section 34 of the Act filed by the Appellants could not be dismissed only on the ground of failure of the Appellants to pay the Sole Arbitrator's fees.

Ratio / Principle

As admitted by the Parties and accepted by this Court, Section 39 of the Act does not provide for outright dismissal of the objection petition under Section 34 of the Act.

Key takeaways

In view of the aforesaid position, the impugned order dated 23.02.2024 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the learned Single Judge for deciding the petition under Section 34 of the Act in accordance with law.ratio¶¶16
The petition under Section 34 of the Act filed by the Appellants shall stand restored to its original number before the learned Single Judge, with the Parties and their counsels directed to appear before him/her on 13.01.2026.ratio¶¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Division Bench (Anil Kshetarpal & Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, JJ.) of the High Court of Delhi, in FAO(OS)(COMM) 87/2024 decided on 09.12.2025, heard an appeal under Section 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against the order dated 23.02.2024 of the learned Single Judge in O.M.P. (COMM) 499/2019, whereby the Appellants' objection petition under Section 34 of the Act was dismissed solely because they failed to pay the fee of the Sole Arbitrator. After argument, counsel for both sides conceded, and the Court accepted, that a Section 34 objection petition could not be dismissed only on the ground of non-payment of the Sole Arbitrator's fees, and that Section 39 of the Act does not provide for outright dismissal of such a petition. Accordingly, the impugned order was set aside, the Section 34 petition was restored to its original number, and the matter was remitted to the learned Single Judge for decision in accordance with law, with the Parties directed to appear on 13.01.2026; the appeal and pending applications were disposed of accordingly.

$~8

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- FAO(OS) (COMM) 87/2024 & CM APPL. 24539/2024 (Addl.Doc)

M/S GLODYNE PEOPLE POWER LTD & ORS. ....Appellants

Through: Mr. Arjun Natarajan, Mr. Mayank Sapra, Ms. Lalima Das, Mr. Aayush Kumar, Mr. Nakul Gupta, Advocates.

versus

M/S CAPARO FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS LTD ...Respondent

Through: Mr. Harender Kumar Sangwan, Advocate for Respondent. Mr. Akhil Mittal, Ms. Riddhi Jain, Ms. Shayna Das Pattanayak and Ms. Archie Garg, Advocates for Sole Arbitrator.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

O R D E R % 09.12.2025

The present Appeal, filed under Section 37(1)(c) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [“ The Act ”], challenges the Order dated 23.02.2024, passed by the learned Single Judge in O.M.P. (COMM) 499/2019, titled “M/s Glodyne People Power Limited & Ors. v. M/s Caparo Financial Solutions Limited” .

Admittedly, the learned Single Judge has dismissed Appellants’ objection petition filed under Section 34 of the Act only on the ground that the Appellants failed to pay fee of the Sole Arbitrator.

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 12/12/2025 at 13:11:32

After arguing at length, learned counsel for the Parties concede that the objections under Section 34 of the Act filed by the Appellants could not be dismissed only on the ground of failure of the Appellants to pay Sole Arbitrator’s fees.

They admit that Section 39 of Act does not provide for outright dismissal of the objection petition under Section 34 of the Act.

Keeping in view the aforesaid position, the impugned order is set aside while remitting the matter to the learned Single Judge for deciding the petition under Section 34 of the Act in accordance with law.

The petition under Section 34 of the Act filed by the Appellants herein shall stand restored to its original number before the learned Single Judge.

Parties along with their counsels are directed to appear before the learned Single Judge on 13.01.2026.

Accordingly, the present Appeal along with pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. DECEMBER 09, 2025/tk/va

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 12/12/2025 at 13:11:32