Sh. Rakesh Kumar Goel Vs Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2026)

Sh. Rakesh Kumar Goel Vs Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dispute between the parties referred to arbitration of Mr. Piyush Mittal, Advocate; arbitration to be held under the aegis of Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC), Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road, New Delhi, governed by the Rules of DIAC including as to remuneration of the Arbitrator; DIAC may register the case forthwith; Arbitrator requested to furnish a declaration under Section 12 of the Act prior to entering upon the reference; all rights and contentions of the parties left open for adjudication by the learned Arbitrator; petition stands disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether an Arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate the disputes between the parties arising out of Work Order dated 23.08.2019, which contains an arbitration clause (Clause 25).

Court's answer

At the stage of proceedings under Section 11(5) of the Act, the Court is only required to satisfy itself prima facie as to the existence of the arbitration agreement.

Ratio / Principle

All other questions (beyond prima facie existence of the arbitration agreement) are to be left to the determination of the learned Arbitrator.

Key takeaways

Since the arbitration clause is not in dispute, the present petition is allowed.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Vikas Mahajan, J.), order dated 21.05.2026 in ARB.P. 658/2026 — Sh. Rakesh Kumar Goel v. Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board & Anr. Petition under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for disputes arising out of Work Order dated 23.08.2019, Clause 25 whereof is the arbitration clause; invocation notice dated 21.10.2023 went unanswered; respondents had no objection to appointment with rights and contentions kept open. Held: at the Section 11(5) stage the Court is only required to satisfy itself prima facie as to the existence of the arbitration agreement, all other questions being left to the learned Arbitrator; since the arbitration clause was not in dispute, the petition was allowed. Dispute referred to Mr. Piyush Mittal, Advocate as Arbitrator; arbitration under the aegis of DIAC, Delhi High Court, governed by DIAC Rules including remuneration; declaration under Section 12 of the Act to be furnished prior to entering upon the reference; petition disposed of.

$~4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- ARB.P. 658/2026

SH. RAKESH KUMAR GOEL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kartik Gupta, Advocate.

versus

DELHI URBAN SHELTER IMPROVEMENT BOARD & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Anuj Chaturvedi and Ms. Richa Dhawan, Advocates.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN O R D E R % 21.05.2026

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) seeking appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties arising out of Work Order dated 23.08.2019. Clause 25 of the said Work Order is an arbitration clause.

The disputes having arising between the parties, the petitioner invoked arbitration by giving a notice dated 21.10.2023 to the respondent, which did not elicit any response.

When the matter was first listed on 15.04.2026, notice was issued and learned counsel appearing for the respondents accepted the same.

Today, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that respondents have no objection in case an Arbitrator is appointed keeping the rights and contentions of the parties open.

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 11:13:16

At the stage of proceedings under Section 11(5) of the Act, the Court is only required to satisfy itself, prima facie, as to the existence of the arbitration agreement. All other questions are to be left to the determination of the learned Arbitrator.

Since the arbitration clause is not in dispute, the present petition is therefore allowed.

Accordingly, the dispute between the parties is referred to arbitration of Mr. Piyush Mittal, Advocate [Mob.9810717949, Email ID: [email protected]] 8. 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. The DIAC may register the case forthwith.

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

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

Petition stands disposed of.

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J

MAY 21, 2026/ jg

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 11:13:16