Tirupati and Associates through Its Proprietor Vs Aga Khan Foundation India

$~6

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- ARB.P. 210/2026

TIRUPATI AND ASSOCIATES THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Santosh Kumar, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Mishra, Adv.

¶5

versus

¶6

AGA KHAN FOUNDATION INDIA .....Respondent Through: Ms. Samiksha Godiyal and Mr. Tenzing Bhutia, Advs.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN O R D E R

¶8

% 23.02.2026

¶9

[Hearing was conducted only through video-conferencing mode on account of public notice dated 19.02.2026 issued by this Court with respect to Bar Council of Delhi elections]

¶10

By way of this petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [in short, „Act‟], the petitioner seeks appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between parties under the two work orders dated 01.03.2024 and 16.02.2025. Clause 21 of both the said work orders contains the arbitration clause.

¶11

Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties are ad idem that there is a specific clause in the agreements which provides that the disputes arising out of the agreements shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the concerned Court situated at Delhi.

¶12

This is a digitally signed order.

¶13

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 14:53:11

¶14

The disputes having arisen between the parties, the petitioner invoked arbitration by giving notice dated 24.11.2025 in terms of Section 21 of the Act. Since the said notice did not fetch any response, the present petition was filed by the petitioner.

¶15

Pursuant to issuance of notice in the present petition, Ms. Samiksha Godiyal, Advocate, enters appearance on behalf of the respondent. She submits that she does not dispute the arbitration clause but there is a specific procedure prescribed under the arbitration clause which must precede the invocation of arbitration. However, she contends that in case the said procedure is waived by the petitioner, she has no objection to the appointment of an Arbitrator.

¶16

Mr. Santosh Kumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that he waives the procedure prescribed under the arbitration clause which would precede the invocation of arbitration. The statement is taken on record.

¶17

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed.

¶18

Accordingly, the dispute between the parties is referred to arbitration of Justice Chander Shekhar, Former Judge of High Court of Delhi, [Mob. 9910384650].

¶19

The arbitration will be held under the aegis of Delhi International Arbitration Centre, Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road, New Delhi – 110003 [“DIAC”] and shall be governed by the Rules of DIAC including as to the remuneration of the learned Arbitrator.

¶20

The learned Arbitrator is requested to furnish a declaration under Section 12 of the Act prior to entering upon the reference.

¶21

It is made clear that all rights and contentions of the parties are left

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

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 14:53:11

¶24

open for adjudication by the learned Arbitrator.

¶25

The petition stands disposed of.

¶26

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J

¶27

FEBRUARY 23, 2026 aj

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

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 14:53:11

Tirupati and Associates through Its Proprietor v. Aga Khan Foundation India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tirupati and Associates through Its Proprietor v. Aga Khan Foundation India

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

Sammaan Capital Limited Formerly Known as Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited Vs J B C G Advisory Services Private Limited and Ors.

Delhivery Limited Vs Nepenthe Coffee and Chocolates Private Limited

Shree Ahuja Properties Private Limited Vs J.B.C.G. Advisory Services Private Limited

Axis Finance Limited Vs Swaraj Kumar Dey and Anr.

Ngenious Solutions Private Limited Vs Titan Biotech Limited

New Delhi Municipal Council Smart City Limited Vs Orion Edutech Pvt. Ltd.