Ms PS2 Consultants Vs Ms Alpha Corp Development Private Limited — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2026)

Ms PS2 Consultants Vs Ms Alpha Corp Development Private Limited — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disputes between the parties referred to arbitration of Mr. Santosh Kumar, 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 DIAC Rules including as to the remuneration of the arbitrator; arbitrator 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.

Issue for consideration

Whether an arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate the disputes between the parties under work order no. ACDPL/KKJ/PS2C/WO/ACWTC/2023-24/001 dated 01.02.2024. +2 more

Court's answer

The petition is allowed and the disputes between the parties are referred to arbitration of Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate.

Ratio / Principle

At the stage of proceedings under Section 11(6) 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 left to the determination of the learned Arbitrator.

Key takeaways

The existence of the arbitration agreement between the parties is not disputed.ratio¶¶17
All rights and contentions of the parties, including the respondent's objection as to the arbitrability of part of the claim, are left open for adjudication by the learned Arbitrator.ratio¶¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(6) — appointment of arbitrator — disputes under work order no. ACDPL/KKJ/PS2C/WO/ACWTC/2023-24/001 dated 01.02.2024 containing Clause 44 arbitration clause with seat at Delhi — petitioner invoked the clause by notice dated 16.03.2026 under Section 21; respondent's reply received after filing of the petition — existence of arbitration agreement not disputed — at the Section 11 stage the Court need only be prima facie satisfied of the existence of the arbitration agreement, leaving all other questions, including the respondent's objection as to arbitrability of part of the claim, to the arbitrator — disputes referred to Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate, under the aegis of Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC), Delhi High Court, per DIAC Rules — declaration under Section 12 to be furnished before entering on reference — petition allowed and stands disposed of.

$~43

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- ARB.P. 804/2026

MS PS2 CONSULTANTS .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nitin Mangla and Mr. Nishchay Kapoor, Advocates.

versus

MS ALPHA CORP DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr. Surjendu Sankar Das, Ms. Annie Mittal and Mr. Vishal Rishi Srivastava, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

O R D E R % 04.05.2026

By way of the present petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter „the Act‟) petitioner seeks appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudication the disputes between the parties under the agreement being work order bearing no. ACDPL/KKJ/PS2C/WO/ACWTC/2023-24/001dated 01.02.2024.

The agreement provides for the resolution of the disputes by arbitration. Clause 44 of the work order contains an arbitration clause. The clause also provides that seat of arbitration shall be at Delhi.

The disputes having arisen between the parties, petitioner invoked the arbitration clause by giving a notice dated 16.03.2026 in terms of Section 21 of the Act. However, reply was received by the petitioner from the respondent after the filing of the present petition.

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 07/05/2026 at 11:33:25

Issue notice. Mr. Surjendu Sankar Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent accepts notice. He submits that in the reply given of the respondent an objection has been taken with regard to the arbitrability of part of the claim. He submits that the respondent be given liberty to raise that objection before the learned Arbitrator.

At the stage of proceedings under Section 11(6) 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.

Insofar as the arbitration agreement is concerned, the same is not disputed.

In that view of the matter, present petition is allowed and disputes between the parties are referred to arbitration of Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate: [Mob.: 9310747175, Email ID: [email protected]].

The arbitration will be held under the aegis of Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC), Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road, New Delhi and will be governed by the Rules of DIAC including as to the remuneration of the learned Arbitrator.

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 4, 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 07/05/2026 at 11:33:25