Disposed¶¶25

M/S Asian Construction Company v. Rites Limited

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Sections 11(6), 16 and 12(2)

Delhi HC23 Mar 2026ARB.P./174/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court, ARB.P. 174/2026, Subramonium Prasad J — Section 11(6) Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 — appointment of sole arbitrator — 'when in doubt, refer' — arbitrability and procedural lapse objections left to be raised before Arbitrator under Section 16 — arbitration under DIAC aegis — construction contract, Pondicherry University Convention Centre — Asian Construction Company v RITES Limited.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with appointment of Mr. Nand Lal Singh, Retd. Engineer, as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes; arbitration under the aegis of DIAC; disclosure under Section 12(2) within two weeks; all rights and contentions of the parties kept open. ¶¶25

M/S Asian Construction Company Vs Rites Limited — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether an arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate the disputes between the parties arising under the Agreement dated 12.07.2017. +1 more

¶¶11

Court's answer

The principle to be followed by a Court adjudicating a petition under Section 11 is 'when in doubt, refer'; since disputes have certainly arisen between the parties, the Court is inclined to appoint an Arbitrator.

¶¶17

Ratio / Principle

Objections regarding arbitrability of the disputes and procedural lapses can be taken before the Arbitrator under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and are not to be decided at the Section 11 stage.

¶¶16

Key takeaways

Mr. Nand Lal Singh, Retd. Engineer, is appointed as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties.ratio¶¶17
The arbitration shall take place under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) and abide by its rules and regulations; the Arbitrator's fees shall be as per the DIAC Schedule of Fees.ratio¶¶18
The Arbitrator is requested to file the requisite disclosure under Section 12(2) of the 1996 Act within two weeks of entering on reference.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 11(6), 16 and 12(2) — Petition under Section 11(6) for appointment of arbitrator for disputes under Agreement dated 12.07.2017 (Construction of Balance Works of Convention Centre with 2500-seat Auditorium for Pondicherry University); work completed with completion certificate dated 30.04.2019; Claim Letters dated 01.06.2024, 14.08.2024 & 03.12.2024 unanswered — Respondent's objections on arbitrability and procedural lapses held to be for the Arbitrator under Section 16 — governing principle 'when in doubt, refer'; disputes having certainly arisen, Mr. Nand Lal Singh, Retd. Engineer, appointed Sole Arbitrator — arbitration under aegis of DIAC with DIAC Schedule of Fees — disclosure under Section 12(2) within two weeks — all rights and contentions kept open; no expression on merits.

¶1

$~1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 174/2026 & I.A. 1985/2026

¶4

M/S ASIAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Kunwar Chandresh, Ms. Poonam Prasad, Mr. Divyansh Singh, Mr. George Lincoln, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

RITES LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vineet Malik & Mr. Akash Ahlawat, Advocates

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

¶10

O R D E R % 23.03.2026

¶11

The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the Petitioner seeking appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties under an Agreement dated 12.07.2017, entered into between the Parties in pursuance of the Letter of Acceptance dated 23.05.2017, for the work of “Construction of Balance Works of Convention Centre having Auditorium of 2500 Seating Capacity and Ancillary Buildings for Pondicherry University at Puducherry”.

¶12

It is the case of the Petitioner that the Petitioner completed the work and a completion certificate was issued in favour of the Petitioner on 30.04.2019. It is stated that Claim Letters dated 01.06.2024, 14.08.2024 & 03.12.2024 were issued by the Petitioner, however, the Respondent failed to

¶13

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 25/03/2026 at 12:19:23

¶14

provide any response to the said Claim Letters.

¶15

Clause 25 of the General Conditions of Contract contains an arbitration clause. The arbitration clause indicates that the seat of the arbitration shall be at Delhi.

¶16

Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent states that there are certain issues regarding arbitrability of the disputes inasmuch as there are procedural lapses. In the opinion of this Court, these objections can be taken before the Arbitrator under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶17

It is now well settled that the principle that has to be followed by the Court adjudicating on the petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is ‘when in doubt, refer’ and in view of the fact that disputes have certainly arisen between the parties, this Court is inclined to appoint an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the Parties. 6. Taking into account the qualifications prescribed in the arbitration clause, Mr. Nand Lal Singh, Retd. Engineer, (Phone No.0120-4569717) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties.

¶18

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.

¶19

The learned Arbitrator is also requested to file the requisite disclosure under Section 12(2) of the 1996 Act within two weeks of entering on reference.

¶20

All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

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 25/03/2026 at 12:19:23

¶23

claims/counter-claims are kept open, to be decided by the learned Arbitrator on their merits, in accordance with law.

¶24

Needless to say, nothing in this order shall be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the contentions of the parties. 11. It is made clear that all the contentions regarding the existence of the arbitrable disputes or the fact that there are procedural lapses shall remain open to be raised before the Arbitrator.

¶25

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

¶26

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J

¶27

MARCH 23, 2026 S. Zakir

¶28

M/S Asian Construction Company v. Rites Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Asian Construction Company v. Rites Limited

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

Residency Resorts Private Limited Vs United Service Institution of India through Director General

Mitali Bhattacharya Vs Presidium Educational Institution Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Sh. Satish Kumar Gandhi Vs M/S Aaarpee Infrabuilt Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Smt Chahat Vs Smt. Munni

M/S National Highways Authority of India Vs M/S Bel-Acc(Jv)

Ramasethu Infrastructure Vs Indian Railway Walfare Organisation