Harpreet and Company Vs Gtl Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2026)

Harpreet and Company Vs Gtl Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appointment of Mr. Shiven Khurana, Advocate, as sole arbitrator with the consent of the parties for adjudication of the disputes; arbitrator's fees governed by Schedule IV of the Act and compliance with Section 12 required before entering upon reference.

Issue for consideration

Whether an arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the respondent having failed to appoint one despite notices under Section 21 of the Act.

Court's answer

The petition is allowed and Mr. Shiven Khurana, Advocate, is appointed sole arbitrator with the consent of the parties for adjudication of the disputes which have arisen between them.

Ratio / Principle

The arbitrator's fees shall be governed by Schedule IV of the Act, and the arbitrator shall comply with Section 12 of the Act before entering upon the reference.

Key takeaways

This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the rival claims of the parties; it is open to the parties to file their respective claims/counter claims before the learned Arbitrator.obiter¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(6) petition for appointment of arbitrator — allowed. Petitioner and respondent entered a License Agreement dated 05.04.2009 for installation of telecom equipment for twenty years; payments ceased after December 2015 despite repeated demands; agreement contained arbitration clause 11. Despite notices dated 26.11.2024 and 25.09.2025 under Section 21 of the Act, the respondent failed to appoint an arbitrator. Respondent's counsel, on instructions, raised no objection to referral. The Court appointed Mr. Shiven Khurana, Advocate, as sole arbitrator with the parties' consent; fees to follow Schedule IV of the Act; arbitrator to comply with Section 12 before entering upon reference. The Court expressly recorded that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits, leaving claims/counter claims open before the arbitrator.

$~6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- ARB.P. 2154/2025

HARPREET AND COMPANY .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Rajesh Mohan Sinha, Mr. Prateek Mohan Sinha, Ms. Namita Sinha, Ms. Nandini Harsh and Mr. Krishnendu Das, Advs.

versus

GTL INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD .....Respondent Through: Ms. Shilpi Shrivastava, Advs. CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

O R D E R % 02.04.2026

The present petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act’) for appointment of an arbitrator. 2. The parties to the lis entered into a License Agreement dated 05.04.2009 under which the petitioner permitted installation of telecom equipment at the suit property for a period of twenty years. Payments were made only till December 2015 and no payments have been made thereafter despite repeated demands. The agreement contains an arbitration clause 11 for resolution of disputes. Disputes arose due to non-payment of dues and despite notices dated 26.11.2024 and 25.09.2025 issued under Section 21 of the Act the respondent has failed to appoint an arbitrator giving rise to the present petition.

Learned counsel for the respondents on instructions has no objection for referring the matters to arbitration.

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 06/04/2026 at 12:33:53

Accordingly, the petition is allowed by appointing Mr. Shiven Khurana, Advocate (Mobile No.: 9958981505) as the sole arbitrator with the consent of the parties for adjudication of the disputes which have arisen between the parties.

The fees of the learned Arbitrator will be governed by Schedule IV of the Act. Before entering upon reference, the learned Arbitrator will comply with Section 12 of the Act.

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.

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

AVNEESH JHINGAN, J

APRIL 2, 2026/PA

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 06/04/2026 at 12:33:53