Allowed¶12

Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd. v. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pt Ltd.

Delhi HC11 Feb 2026ARB.P./1837/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 appointment of sole arbitrator by consent; KONE Elevator India Pvt Ltd vs Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt Ltd; Delhi High Court ARB.P. 1837/2025; Justice Avneesh Jhingan; arbitrator Arun Kumar Arya retired District and Sessions Judge; proceedings under DIAC aegis; fee per fee schedule; Section 12 disclosure/compliance before entering reference; no opinion on merits; claims and counter claims permitted; amicable resolution option; decision dated 11.02.2026.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Shri Arun Kumar Arya, District and Sessions Judge (Retd.), as sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties, with proceedings under the aegis of DIAC, fee as per fee schedule, and Section 12 compliance required before entering upon reference. ¶12

Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pt… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether an arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate the disputes arising between KONE Elevator India Pvt Ltd and Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt Ltd.

¶11

Court's answer

The Section 11 petition is allowed and Shri Arun Kumar Arya, District and Sessions Judge (Retd.), is appointed as the sole arbitrator for adjudication of the disputes which have arisen between the parties.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

Arbitral proceedings will be held under the aegis of Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC), with the arbitrator's fee fixed as per the fee schedule.

¶13

Key takeaways

The learned arbitrator must comply with Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before entering upon reference.ratio¶17
The Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the rival claims; it remains open to the parties to file their respective claims/counter claims before the arbitrator, to be considered in accordance with law.obiter¶18
The parties, if they so desire, may attempt to resolve the disputes amicably.obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

KONE ELEVATOR INDIA PVT LTD v. SHAPOORJI PALLONJI AND COMPANY PT LTD (Delhi High Court, ARB.P. 1837/2025, Avneesh Jhingan, J., 11.02.2026): Consent-based appointment of arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. With the respondent raising no serious objection and both parties agreeing, the petition was allowed and Shri Arun Kumar Arya, District and Sessions Judge (Retd.), appointed as sole arbitrator for the disputes between the parties. Arbitral proceedings to be conducted under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) with the arbitrator's fee fixed as per the fee schedule; the arbitrator to comply with Section 12 before entering upon reference. The Court expressly recorded no opinion on the merits, leaving the parties free to file claims/counter claims, and noting they may attempt amicable resolution.

¶1

$~10

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 1837/2025

¶4

KONE ELEVATOR INDIA PVT LTD .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Kunal Kher & Mr. Manuj Gautam, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

SHAPOORJI PALLONJI AND COMPANY PT LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Babit Singh Jamwal, Adv.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 11.02.2026

¶11

The present petition is filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short „the Act‟) for appointment of an arbitrator. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent on instructions has no serious objection for referring the matter to arbitration.

¶12

Learned counsels for the parties agree to the appointment of Shri Arun Kumar Arya, District and Sessions Judge (Retd.), as the sole arbitrator. 4. The petition is allowed and Shri Arun Kumar Arya, District and Sessions Judge (Retd.) (Mobile No. 9910384687), is appointed as the sole arbitrator for adjudication of the disputes which have arisen between the parties.

¶13

Arbitral proceedings will be held under the aegis of Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC). Fee of the Arbitrator shall be fixed

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

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 16/02/2026 at 12:02:51

¶16

as per fee schedule.

¶17

Before entering upon reference, the learned Arbitrator will comply with Section 12 of the Act.

¶18

It is made clear that since this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the rival claims of the parties, it will be open for the parties to file their respective claims/counter claims before the learned Arbitrator which will be considered in accordance with law.

¶19

The parties if so desire may attempt to resolve the disputes amicably.

¶20

A copy of this order be forwarded to the learned Arbitrator for information.

¶21

AVNEESH JHINGAN, J

¶22

FEBRUARY 11, 2026 ‘ha’

¶23

This is a digitally signed order.

¶24

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 16/02/2026 at 12:02:51

Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd. v. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pt Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd. v. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pt Ltd.

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

Genesis Finance Company Limited 4 Mmtc Stc Market Geetanjali New Delhi 110017 Vs Pankaj Saran

Orchid Global Private Limited Vs Mother Dairy Fruit and Vegetable Pvt. Ltd.

Vandana Agrawal & Ors. Vs Fam Bhagat Infratech (P) Ltd.

Bharat Heavy Electrical Limited Vs Jhabua Power Limited

Simplex Infrastructure Limited Vs National Highways Authority of India

Paramount Wires and Cables Ltd. Vs Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited