Allowed

Shambhu Sharma v. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited

Delhi HC20 May 2026ARB.P./376/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Section 11(6) sought appointment of arbitrator for lease deed disputes. The Court held the Section 21 notice validly invoked arbitration on holistic reading, appointed an advocate as sole arbitrator, directed proceedings under DIAC rules, with all contentions left open.

What the court decided

AI extract

Shambhu Sharma Vs Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~6

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 376/2026

¶4

SHAMBHU SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Bharat Bagga and Ms. Mansi Asija, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LIMITED .....Respondent

¶7

Through: Mr. Prashant Sharma, Adv.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

¶9

O R D E R % 20.05.2026

¶10

I.A. 5512/2026 (under Section 151 CPC for delay in refiling)

¶11

The present application has been seeking condonation of delay of 45 days in refiling the petition.

¶12

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed.

¶13

The application is disposed of.

¶14

ARB.P. 376/2026

¶15

By way of this petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter ‘the Act’), the petitioner seeks appointment of an arbitration to adjudicate the disputes between the parties under the lease deed dated 24.06.2004.

¶16

Clause 11.0 provides for adjudication of disputes through arbitration.

¶17

Disputes having arisen between the parties, the petitioner invoked arbitration by issuing a notice under Section 21 of the Act dated 08.09.2025,

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

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 25/05/2026 at 11:15:32

¶20

which did not elicit any response.

¶21

In this backdrop, the present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 11(6) of the Act.

¶22

Notice in the present petition was issued by this Court vide order dated 27.02.2026.

¶23

Mr. Prashant Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent submits that the notice does not, in clear terms invoke the arbitration clause. To buttress his contention he has invited attention of the Court to the phrase in the said notice wherein it has been mentioned “ failing which our client would invoke the arbitration clause as per clause 11.0 of the lease deed dated 24.06.2024 ”.

¶24

Having perused the said notice, this Court is of the view that on meaningful and holistic reading of notice, it is clear that the petitioner has invoked the arbitration inasmuch as the subject of the notice clearly spells out that it is a notice for appointment of arbitrator and the settlement of claim according to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Hence, there is no substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent.

¶25

On being queried as to whether the respondent is disputing the existence of arbitration clause, Mr. Sharma fairly state that existence of arbitration clause is not in dispute.

¶26

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and the parties are referred to arbitration of Mr. Anukirat Singh Baweja, Advocate; Enrl. No. D/3549/2022 [Mob. 7018049239].

¶27

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

¶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 25/05/2026 at 11:15:32

¶30

remuneration of the learned Arbitrator. The DIAC may register the case forthwith.

¶31

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

¶32

It is made clear that all rights and contentions of the parties are left open for adjudication by the learned Arbitrator.

¶33

Petition stands disposed of.

¶34

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J

¶35

MAY 20, 2026 N.S. ASWAL

¶36

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 25/05/2026 at 11:15:32

Shambhu Sharma v. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Shambhu Sharma v. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Subhash Chander Kapoor Vs M/S Hpm Foods Pvt. Ltd. through Its Directors

Ms Raj Chugh and Anr. Vs M/S Hpm Foods Pvt. Ltd. through Its Directors

Kanta Kumari Vs Hpm Foods Pvt. Ltd. through Its Directors

Swarovski India Private Limited Vs Nazima Rehman Proprietor of Glittex Inc.

Qc One Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Delhi Metro Rail Corporation

Sriram Cables Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India