Tata Capital Limited Vs Bharat Bhushan Singhal

$~7

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- ARB.P. 477/2026

TATA CAPITAL LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nachiketa Suri, Mr. Raj Kumar, Mr. Kashish Aggarwal, Ms. Shubhangi Singh and Ms. Puja Mann, Advs. Mob: 9999748620 Email: [email protected]

¶5

versus

¶6

BHARAT BHUSHAN SINGHAL .....Respondent Through: None.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

¶8

O R D E R % 23.04.2026

¶9

Office noting shows that the respondent has been served through E- mail by the Registry.

¶10

However, affidavit of service has also been filed on behalf of the petitioner, as per which, the respondent stands served through other modes.

¶11

None appears for the respondent, when the matter is called out.

¶12

Accordingly, this Court proceeds with the matter.

¶13

The present petition has been filed seeking appointment of an Arbitrator, under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Arbitration Act”), to adjudicate the disputes arising between the petitioner and the respondent in terms of Clause 9 of the Loan Agreement dated 20^th

¶14

Page 1 of 4

¶15

This is a digitally signed order.

¶16

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 27/04/2026 at 11:17:20

¶17

May, 2024.

¶18

Attention of this Court has been drawn to the Clause 9 of the Agreement between the parties, which reads as under:

¶19

“xxx xxx xxx

¶20

xxx xxx xxx”

¶21

By referring to the aforesaid, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that though the Arbitration Clause between the parties specifies certain institutions in Chennai and Bengaluru, which shall appoint the sole Arbitrator, however, as per the Clause h , as aforesaid, any Arbitral Institution designated under the provisions of the Arbitration Act, or any panel of Arbitrator maintained under the provisions of the said Act, shall also be valid appointment of an Arbitrator.

¶22

He, thus, submits that the present petition has been filed before this Court with prayer that the matter be referred to Delhi International Arbitration Centre (“DIAC”), for appointment of an Arbitrator.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the approximate claim as raised by the petitioner is to the tune of Rs. 18,59,279/-.

¶24

Page 2 of 4

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

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 27/04/2026 at 11:17:20

¶27

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further draws the attention of this Court to Clause 13 and 14, wherein, the place of arbitration has been specified as Delhi/Calcutta/Chennai/Kochi, and the jurisdiction clause also confers jurisdiction upon the Courts in Delhi/Calcutta/Chennai/Kochi.

¶28

Thus, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has validly given his choice and has chosen Delhi, as the place of arbitration, as well as for the purposes of jurisdiction.

¶29

Considering the submissions made before this Court, following directions are issued:

¶30

(i) The Delhi International Arbitration Centre, Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road, New Delhi (referred to as the ‘DIAC’) shall appoint the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. (ii) The arbitration will be held under the aegis and rules of the DIAC.

¶31

(iii) The remuneration of the learned Arbitrator shall be in terms of DIAC (Administrative Cost and Arbitrators’ Fees) Rules, 2018. (iv) The learned Arbitrator is requested to furnish a declaration in terms of Section 12 of the Arbitration Act prior to entering into the reference.

¶32

(v) It shall be open to the respondent to raise counter-claims, if any, in arbitration proceedings.

¶33

(vi) It is made clear that all the rights and contentions of the parties, including as to the arbitrability of any of the claim, any other preliminary objection, as well as claims/counter-claims and merits of the dispute of either of the parties, are left open for adjudication by

¶34

Page 3 of 4

¶35

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 27/04/2026 at 11:17:20

¶36

the learned arbitrator.

¶37

(vii) The parties shall approach the learned Arbitrator within two weeks from appointment of the Arbitrator.

¶38

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

¶39

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 15. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Secretary, DIAC for information and compliance.

¶40

MINI PUSHKARNA, J

¶41

APRIL 23, 2026/ SK

¶42

Page 4 of 4

¶43

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 27/04/2026 at 11:17:20

Tata Capital Limited v. Bharat Bhushan Singhal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tata Capital Limited v. Bharat Bhushan Singhal

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

Anupam Walia through Special Power of Attorney Holder Capt. Rakesh Walia Retd. Vs Roopa Arora & Anr.

Axis Finance Limited Vs Rahil Akhtar Ansari

Axis Finance Limited Vs Sunilkumar N Dube

Sarr Freights Corporation Vs Rites Limited

Sarr Freights Corporation Vs Rites Limited

Anil Madan & Anr. Vs Manish Madan & Anr.