Disposed¶29

M/S Yashika Growth Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S Cogent Transware Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Delhi HC4 May 2026ARB.P./414/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court ARB.P. 414/2026 (04.05.2026, Subramonium Prasad J): Section 11(6) appointment of sole arbitrator Ms. Asmita Singh; Manpower Services Agreement 23.01.2021; Clause 12 arbitration clause; seat Delhi; DIAC aegis and fee schedule; Section 12(2) disclosure in two weeks; claim Rs.16,35,978/- due Feb 2025; Section 21 notice; rights and contentions kept open; petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Ms. Asmita Singh, Advocate as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes; arbitration to be conducted under the aegis of DIAC with fees per its Schedule of Fees; arbitrator to file disclosure under Section 12(2) within two weeks of entering on reference; all rights and contentions kept open. ¶29

M/S Yashika Growth Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Cogent Transware Solutions… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether an arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate the disputes between the parties arising under the Manpower Services Agreement dated 23.01.2021, which contains arbitration Clause 12. +1 more

¶22

Court's answer

Ms. Asmita Singh, Advocate (Mob. No: 9643520339) is appointed as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

In absence of any contrary indica, the seat of arbitration is to be construed as Delhi, the clause specifying that the arbitration shall be at Delhi.

¶20

Key takeaways

The arbitration shall take place under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC), abide by its rules and regulations, and the arbitrator shall be entitled to fees as per the DIAC Schedule of Fees.ratio¶23
The learned Arbitrator is requested to file the requisite disclosure under Section 12(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 within two weeks of entering on reference.ratio¶24
All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the claims/counter-claims are kept open, to be decided by the learned Arbitrator on their merits, in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Section 11(6) petition (ARB.P. 414/2026, High Court of Delhi, Subramonium Prasad, J., 04.05.2026): disputes between M/S Yashika Growth Pvt Ltd and M/S Cogent Transware Solutions Pvt. Ltd under a Manpower Services Agreement dated 23.01.2021 for manpower supplied in U.P. and Haryana; Rs.16,35,978/- stated due and pending as on February 2025; notice under Section 21 invoking arbitration per Clause 12; clause specifies arbitration at Delhi, so seat construed as Delhi absent contrary indica; Respondent raised no objection; Ms. Asmita Singh, Advocate appointed Sole Arbitrator; arbitration under aegis of DIAC with fees per DIAC Schedule; disclosure under Section 12(2) within two weeks of entering on reference; all rights and contentions on claims/counter-claims kept open; order not an expression on merits; petition disposed of along with pending applications.

¶1

$~3

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 414/2026

¶4

M/S YASHIKA GROWTH PVT LTD .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Nag, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

M/S COGENT TRANSWARE SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD

¶8

.....Respondent

¶9

Through: Mr. Hitesh Chopra, Mr. Rahul Kumar and Mr. Parth Sinha, Advocates.

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

% 04.05.2026

¶13

The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes which have arisen between the parties under a Manpower Services Agreement dated 23.01.2021 ( hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’ ).

¶14

It is the case of the Petitioner that as per the said Agreement, the Respondents took the services of the Petitioner for providing manpower at different locations in the State of U.P. and Haryana.

¶15

It is stated that a sum of Rs.16,35,978/- was due and pending as on February, 2025. A legal notice was issued by the Petitioner on 04.06.2025 which was replied to by the Respondent on 07.06.2025.

¶16

It is stated that since the disputes arose between the parties, the Petitioner issued a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration & Conciliation

¶17

This is a digitally signed order.

¶18

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 20/05/2026 at 15:04:01

¶19

Act, 1996 invoking arbitration in terms of Clause 12 of the Agreement.

¶20

Clause 12 of the Agreement provides for a dispute resolution wherein the parties have agreed to get their disputes resolved through arbitration. The said clause specifies that the arbitration shall be at Delhi and therefore, in absence of any contrary indica , the seat of arbitration is to be construed as Delhi.

¶21

Notice in the present Petition was issued on 13.03.2026. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent states that he has no objection to the present Petition.

¶22

In view of the fact that disputes have arisen between the parties and the Agreements contain an arbitration clause, this Court is inclined to appoint an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties. 8. Accordingly, Ms. Asmita Singh, Advocate (Mob. No: 9643520339) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties.

¶23

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.

¶24

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

¶25

All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the claims/counter-claims are kept open, to be decided by the learned Arbitrator on their merits, in accordance with law.

¶26

Needless to say, nothing in this order shall be construed as an

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

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 20/05/2026 at 15:04:01

¶29

expression of this Court on the merits of the contentions of the parties. 13. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms, along with pending application(s), if any.

¶30

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J

¶31

MAY 4, 2026 Rahul

¶32

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 20/05/2026 at 15:04:01

M/S Yashika Growth Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S Cogent Transware Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Yashika Growth Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S Cogent Transware Solutions Pvt. 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

Shigan Quantum Technologies Ltd. Vs Westport Fuel Systems Italia S.R.L.

Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Aarti Sales and Ors.

Ms. Kaveri Sarup Vs the State Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi & Ors.

Pro-Interactive Services (India) Private Limited Vs Sajm Brand Hub Pvt. Ltd.

Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. Vs Gyt Tpl Joint Venture

Yogender Chandolia Vs Vishesh Ravi & Ors.