Arbitration petition under Section 11(6) seeking appointment of an arbitrator. Counsel sought leave to withdraw with liberty to approach DIAC, a competent arbitral institution though unnamed in Clause 9 of the agreement. Petition disposed of with liberty reserved.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~39
TATA CAPITAL LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Nachiketa Suri, Mr. Raj Kumar and Mr. Kashish Aggarwal, Advocates
versus
VINITA GUPTA & ANR. .....Respondents Through:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
O R D E R % 19.05.2026
I.A. 14058/2026 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
ARB.P. 912/2026
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 11:12:50
liberty to the Petitioner to approach this Court in the event DIAC does not appoint an Arbitrator.
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J
MAY 19, 2026 Prateek
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 11:12:50
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11(6) to adjudicate the parties' disputes.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Tata Capital Limited
Vinita Gupta
Subramonium Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
