Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Shobha Ano Prints Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and Ors. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2026)

Home
Delhi HC
2026
Shobha Ano Prints Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and OrShobha Ano Prints Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.

Disposed¶¶19

Shobha Ano Prints Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.

Delhi HC17 Feb 2026ARB. A. (COMM.)/23/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Change of venue of arbitration; Section 17 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 application; venue shifted from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi to Central Ordinance Depot/Computerised Inventory Control Group, Delhi Cantt. on respondents' instructions; Union of India; Shobha Ano Prints Pvt Ltd; maintainability of Section 17 appeal left undecided; appeal disposed of on counsel's statement recorded and respondents bound; Delhi High Court, single Judge (Vikas Mahajan, J.), 17.02.2026.

What did the court decide?

Venue of the arbitration to be changed from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi to Central Ordinance Depot/Computerised Inventory Control Group, Delhi Cantt., with the respondents bound down to the statement of their counsel; the appeal along with the pending application (I.A. 3998/2026) disposed of in those terms, with no further orders warranted.

Why is it important?

The respondents, through their counsel's instructions, committed to changing the venue of the arbitration from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi to Central Ordinance Depot/Computerised Inventory Control Group, Delhi Cantt., and counsel for the appellant raised no objection. ¶¶13

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Venue of the arbitration to be changed from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi to Central Ordinance Depot/Computerised Inventory Control Group, Delhi Cantt., with the respondents bound down to the statement of their counsel; the appeal along with the pending application (I.A. 3998/2026) disposed of in those terms, with no further orders warranted.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 09.02.2026 rejecting the appellant's application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for change of venue from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi should be set aside / the venue changed (maintainability of the appeal expressly left open by the Court).

Court's answer

The respondents, through their counsel's instructions, committed to changing the venue of the arbitration from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi to Central Ordinance Depot/Computerised Inventory Control Group, Delhi Cantt., and counsel for the appellant raised no objection.

Ratio / Principle

The statement of the respondents' counsel regarding the change of venue was taken on record and the respondents were bound down to it.

Key takeaways

The objection with regard to maintainability of the present appeal was not gone into by the Court (point expressly left open).obiter¶¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Vikas Mahan, J.) — ARB. A. (COMM.) 23/2026 & I.A. 3998/2026, decided 17.02.2026: Appeal by Shobha Ano Prints Pvt Ltd against order dated 09.02.2026 rejecting its application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for change of venue of the arbitration from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi. On notice, the CGSC for Union of India returned with instructions that the venue would be changed to Central Ordinance Depot/Computerised Inventory Control Group, Delhi Cantt., to which appellant's counsel had no objection. The statement was taken on record and the respondents bound down to it. The Court expressly did not go into the maintainability of the appeal. The appeal and pending application were disposed of accordingly.

A

$~62

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- ARB. A. (COMM.) 23/2026 & I.A. 3998/2026

SHOBHA ANO PRINTS PVT LTD .....Appellant Through: Mr. Harsh, Mr. Angad Mehta, Mr. Arsh and Mr. S. Ram Babu, Advs.

versus

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Abhishek Gupta, CGSC with Mr. Adhiraj Singh and Mr. Kartikey Kumar, Advs. for UOI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

O R D E R % 17.02.2026

The present appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 09.02.2026 whereby the application of the appellant filed under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [in short, 8Act9], for change of venue from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi was rejected.

Notice in the present petition was issued vide order dated 12.02.2026.

Mr. Abhishek Gupta, learned CGSC had accepted notice on behalf of respondent no.1/UOI and had sought time to seek instructions.

Today, he has returned with instructions to the effect that the venue will be changed from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi to Central Ordinance Depot/Computerised Inventory Control Group, Delhi Cantt., to which, Mr. Harsh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has no objection.

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 19/02/2026 at 12:11:41

The statement of Mr. Gupta is taken on record and the respondents are bound down to the same.

Needless to say that the objection with regard to maintainability of the present appeal, has not been gone into by the Court.

In view of the above, no further orders are warranted in the present appeal.

The appeal along with pending application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J

FEBRUARY 17, 2026 aj

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 19/02/2026 at 12:11:41

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the order dated 09.02.2026 rejecting the appellant's application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for change of venue from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi should be set aside / the venue changed (maintainability of the appeal expressly left open by the Court).medium confidence¶¶10
The court held
The respondents, through their counsel's instructions, committed to changing the venue of the arbitration from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi to Central Ordinance Depot/Computerised Inventory Control Group, Delhi Cantt., and counsel for the appellant raised no objection.ratio¶¶13

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 199617¶¶10

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order dated 09.02.2026 rejecting the appellant's application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for change of venue from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi.¶¶10
09.02.2026
Prior proceeding
The appellant's application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking change of venue from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi was rejected by order dated 09.02.2026, against which the present appeal was filed.¶¶10
Prior proceeding
Notice in the present petition was issued vide order dated 12.02.2026.¶¶11
Prior proceeding
The learned CGSC accepted notice on behalf of respondent no.1/UOI and sought time to seek instructions.¶¶12
Prior proceeding
On the next date, the CGSC returned with instructions that the venue would be changed from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi to Central Ordinance Depot/Computerised Inventory Control Group, Delhi Cantt., to which counsel for the appellant had no objection.¶¶13

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
SHOBHA ANO PRINTS PVT LTD¶¶4
Mr. Harsh, Mr. Angad Mehta, Mr. Arsh, Mr. S. Ram Babu
respondent
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.¶¶6
Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Mr. Adhiraj Singh, Mr. Kartikey Kumar

Coram

AI extract

VIKAS MAHAJANauthor¶¶8

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Delhi HC
Decided on: 17 Feb 2026 · February
Registered: 11 Feb 2026
Case no.: ARB. A. (COMM.)/23/2026
CNR: DLHC010051132026
Topic: Arbitration
Bench: Vikas Mahajan
Case type: ARB. A. (COMM.)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Vikas Mahajan

Rani Saini Vs Ram Kishan Since Deceased through Lrs and Ors.
16 Feb 2026
Jatin Kohli & Anr. Vs Smt. Sushma Mittal & Ors.
16 Feb 2026Civil Suit (Original Side)
Innovision Limited Vs Orient Craft Limited
13 Feb 2026Arbitration Miscellaneous Petition
M/S B K Structural Contracts Private Ltd. Vs Mr Taqi Abbas
17 Feb 2026
Mr Rajeev Verma Vs Mr Rajesh Verma
17 Feb 2026Civil Suit (Original Side)
Pawan Khera Vs Arnab Goswami & Ors.
17 Feb 2026Civil Suit (Original Side)

Cite this judgement

Shobha Ano Prints Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors., ARB. A. (COMM.)/23/2026 (DEL), decided on 17 February 2026.

The High Court of Delhi publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 199617

View all statutes

Procedural history5

Order dated 09.02.2026 rejecting the appellant's application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for change of venue from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi.09.02.2026
The appellant's application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking change of venue from Sena Bhawan, New Delhi was rejected by order dated 09.02.2026, against which the present appeal was filed.
Notice in the present petition was issued vide order dated 12.02.2026.

View full history

Bench / Coram

VIKAS MAHAJAN

Parties & counsel