Disposed¶28

M/S Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Vishal

Delhi HC17 Feb 2026ARB.P./117/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 11(6) Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996 appointment of sole arbitrator; arbitration clause in employment/appointment letter (Clause 13); employee resignation by email allegedly contrary to contract; Section 21 demand notice unanswered; Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) administration and fee schedule; Section 12(2) disclosure by arbitrator; ARB.P.; High Court of Delhi; Justice Subramonium Prasad; decision 17.02.2026.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Mr. Vibhu Anshuman, Advocate, as Sole Arbitrator, with arbitration administered under the aegis of DIAC; the petition stands disposed of along with pending application(s), if any. ¶28

M/S Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Vishal — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appointment of Mr. Vibhu Anshuman, Advocate, as Sole Arbitrator, with arbitration administered under the aegis of DIAC; the petition stands disposed of along with pending application(s), if any.

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether an arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate the disputes between the petitioner and the respondent arising out of the respondent's engagement and alleged resignation contrary to the Appointment Letter's terms.

¶12

Court's answer

Mr. Vibhu Anshuman, Advocate, is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The arbitration shall take place under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC), shall abide by its rules and regulations, and the arbitrator shall be entitled to fees as per the DIAC Schedule of Fees.

¶21

Key takeaways

The learned Arbitrator is requested to file the requisite disclosure under Section 12(2) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act within a week of entering on reference.ratio¶22
All rights and contentions of the parties regarding claims/counter-claims are left open to be decided by the arbitrator on their merits; nothing in the order is to be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the parties' contentions.obiter¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(6) petition for appointment of arbitrator. Employer-petitioner relied on Clause 13 of an Appointment Letter dated 12.08.2024 engaging the respondent as Deputy Manager - Audit, Pusa Road Branch, Delhi, described as the arbitration clause with exclusive Delhi jurisdiction. Disputes arose after the respondent, on receipt of salary for February 2025, ceased attending office and resigned by emails dated 03.03.2025 and 05.03.2025, which the petitioner contended violated the engagement terms. A Section 21 notice dated 17.09.2025 went unanswered though served by email. The Delhi High Court (Subramonium Prasad, J.) appointed Mr. Vibhu Anshuman, Advocate as Sole Arbitrator; the arbitration is to proceed under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) with fees per the DIAC Schedule of Fees; the arbitrator must file the Section 12(2) disclosure within a week of entering on reference; all claims, counter-claims and contentions were left open for the arbitrator, the order expressing no view on the merits. Petition disposed of with pending applications, if any. Decision dated 17.02.2026.

¶1

$~2

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 117/2026 & I.A. 1149/2026

¶4

M/S MONEYWISE FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT LTD

¶5

.....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Ms. Preeti Kumari, Adv.

¶7

versus

¶8

VISHAL .....Respondent

¶9

Through: Mr. Chandan Prajapati, Mr.Vikrant Malwal and Mr. Mukul Kumar, Advocates.

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

¶11

O R D E R % 17.02.2026

¶12

This is a petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, for appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes which have arisen between the parties.

¶13

It is stated that by way of an Appointment Letter dated 12.08.2024, the Respondent was appointed by the Petitioner as a Deputy Manager - Audit, Pusa Road Branch, Delhi.

¶14

As per the Petitioner, after receipt of salary for February 2025, the Respondent stopped coming to office and thereafter, the Respondent sent his resignation letter through emails dated 03.03.2025 and 05.03.2025. It is the case of the Petitioner that the said resignation is contrary to the terms as mentioned in the Appointment Letter.

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶16

ARB.P. 117/2026

¶17

This is a digitally signed order.

¶18

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 25/02/2026 at 14:53:17

¶19

It is stated since disputes arose between the parties on account of the conduct of the Respondent being contrary to his terms of engagement, a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, was issued by the Petitioner on 17.09.2025, invoking Clause 13 of the Appointment Letter dated 12.08.2024 which is the arbitration clause and specifies that the courts at Delhi shall have sole and exclusive jurisdiction. The said Legal Notice has not been replied to by the Respondent. However, the Legal Notice was served to the Respondent through email, and the proof of service is filed by the Petitioner along with the present Petition.

¶20

Notice was issued in the present Petition on 16.01.2026. The Respondent stands served. 6. Accordingly, Mr. Vibhu Anshuman, Advocate (Mob No: 9911012008) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties.

¶21

The arbitration would take place under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) and would abide by its rules and regulations. The learned Arbitrator shall be entitled to fees as per the Schedule of Fees maintained by the DIAC.

¶22

The learned Arbitrator is also requested to file the requisite disclosure under Section 12(2) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act within a week of entering on reference. 9. All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the claims/counter-claims are kept open, to be decided by the learned Arbitrator on their merits, in accordance with law.

¶23

Needless to state, nothing in this order shall be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the contentions of the parties.

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

ARB.P. 117/2026

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 25/02/2026 at 14:53:17

¶28

The present Petition stands disposed of in the above terms along with pending application(s), if any.

¶29

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J

¶30

FEBRUARY 17, 2026 hsk

¶31

Page 3 of 3

¶32

ARB.P. 117/2026

¶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 25/02/2026 at 14:53:17

M/S Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Vishal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Vishal

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

Nand Kishore Malhan Vs Dimple Anand & Anr.

Aaa Infosystem Private Limited through Its Authorized Representative Mr Madhusudan Nair Vs Rma Estates and Industries Private Limited

M/S. Rolexco Buildtech Opc Private Limited Vs Sh. Sunder Lal Gupta & Ors.

Jeet Singh @ Ajeet Singh Vs Samey Singh

Viphil Jain Vs State NCT of Delhi

Sap Electro Contracts Pvt. Ltd. Vs Pacifica Hotels India Pvt. Ltd.