Sap Electro Contracts Pvt. Ltd. Vs Pacifica Hotels India Pvt. Ltd.

This is a petition 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.

¶11

The facts of the case reveal that in the year 2024, the Respondent floated a tender for various works at its Hotel Le Meridien Project, Ahmedabad. The Petitioner’s offer was accepted by the Respondent and work orders for execution of electrical works were awarded to the Petitioner. After completion of the works, the Petitioner submitted bills for the work done and the Respondent failed to release the full payment.

¶12

Disputes arose between the parties regarding the outstanding dues payable by the Respondent to the Petitioner, for which the Petitioner issued a Legal Notice dated 13.11.2025 invoking arbitration in terms of Arbitration Clause No. 23 of Work Orders No. 11 and 12 and proposed names for appointment of Arbitrator.

¶13

It is stated that the Petitioner’s Legal Notice was replied to by the Respondent on 19.12.2025, however, the Respondent failed to appoint any

¶14

ARB.P. 77/2026 Page 1 of 2

¶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 25/02/2026 at 14:53:01

¶17

Arbitrator and therefore, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the instant Petition.

¶18

Notice was issued in the present Petition on 13.01.2026. The Respondent stands served.

¶19

Accordingly, Mr. Shivam Sachdeva, Advocate (Mob No: 9971358035) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties.

¶20

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 Sole Arbitrator shall be entitled to fees as per the Schedule of Fees maintained by the DIAC.

¶21

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

¶22

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 including the existence or otherwise of the disputes.

¶23

Needless to state, nothing in this Order shall be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the contentions of the parties.

¶24

The present Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, along with pending application(s), if any.

¶25

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J

¶26

FEBRUARY 17, 2026 hsk

¶27

ARB.P. 77/2026 Page 2 of 2

¶28

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 25/02/2026 at 14:53:01

Sap Electro Contracts Pvt. Ltd. v. Pacifica Hotels India Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sap Electro Contracts Pvt. Ltd. v. Pacifica Hotels India 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

Nand Kishore Malhan Vs Dimple Anand & Anr.

Aaa Infosystem Private Limited through Its Authorized Representative Mr Madhusudan Nair Vs Rma Estates and Industries Private Limited

M/S. Rolexco Buildtech Opc Private Limited Vs Sh. Sunder Lal Gupta & Ors.

M/S Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Vishal

Jeet Singh @ Ajeet Singh Vs Samey Singh

Viphil Jain Vs State NCT of Delhi