Welkin Infracon Pvt. Ltd., Formerly Known as Welkin India… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2026)

Welkin Infracon Pvt. Ltd., Formerly Known as Welkin India… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive interim relief pronounced by this Court; the Petitioner was directed to canvass the reliefs as sought before the learned Arbitral Tribunal as and when it enters upon the reference.

Issue for consideration

Whether interim orders should issue restraining Respondent No. 1 from invoking/encashing the bank guarantee/security of the Petitioner deposited with Respondent No. 2. +2 more

Ratio / Principle

The reliefs as sought in the present Petition may be canvassed by the Petitioner before the learned Arbitral Tribunal, as and when it enters upon the reference.

Key takeaways

The present petition along with the pending applications stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, J., 20.02.2026) disposed of O.M.P.(I)(COMM.) 75/2026, a S.9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 petition by Welkin Infracon Pvt. Ltd. (formerly Welkin India Incorporate) against the National Highways Authority of India (& ANR.). The Petitioner had sought orders restraining Respondent No. 1 from invoking/encashing its bank guarantee/security deposited with Respondent No. 2, restraining Respondent No. 2 from releasing any amount against it, and restraining Respondent No. 1 from giving effect to a Termination notice dated 16/02/2026, by which the agreement was unilaterally terminated. Learned counsel for both sides were ad idem that the matter be referred to arbitration: Clause 26 of the Engineering, Procurement & Construction Agreement dated 15.03.2024 envisages arbitration under the SAROD Rules, with each party nominating its arbitrator and the nominees appointing the Presiding Arbitrator by consensus, a procedure the parties undertook to complete within two weeks. The Court did not itself pronounce on the sought restraints, directing instead that they be canvassed before the learned Arbitral Tribunal when it enters upon the reference, and disposed of the petition together with pending I.A. 4749/2026 and I.A. 4750/2026.

$~32

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 75/2026, I.A. 4749/2026 (For Ad-Interim Stay) & I.A. 4750/2026 (For Permission to filed list of dates & Events Exceeding 5 pages)

WELKIN INFRACON PVT. LTD., FORMERLY KNOWN AS WELKIN INDIA INCORPORATE .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Dalal, Senior Advocate along with Ms. Dipika Prasad, Mr. Vikram Singh Dalal, Mr. Ankit Rana, Ms. Shipra Bali, Mr. Pankaj Kumar and Mr. Satwik Mitra, Advocates.

versus

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Santosh Kumar, Standing Counsel along with Mr. Devansh Malhotra, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

O R D E R % 20.02.2026

The present petition has been filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking the following reliefs:

“.....

A. Pass an appropriate order thereby restraining Respondent No. 1 from invoking/encashing the bank guarantee/security of the Petitioner deposited with the Respondent No. 2;

B. Pass an appropriate order thereby restraining Respondent No.2 from releasing any amount in favour of the Respondent No.1 and against the Petitioner.;

C. Pass an appropriate order thereby restraining the Respondent No.1 from giving effect to Termination notice dated 16/02/2026 which agreement was unilaterally terminated by the Respondent No.1;

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 24/02/2026 at 12:30:55

Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties are ad idem that the matter may be referred to arbitration. Learned counsel for the Respondent submits that Clause 26 of the Engineering, Procurement & Construction Agreement dated 15.03.2024 envisages arbitration to be conducted in accordance with the Rules of the Society for Affordable Redressal of Disputes (“SAROD”).

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties further submit that, in terms of the dispute resolution clause, each party is required to nominate its Arbitrator, and the nominated Arbitrators shall thereafter, by consensus, appoint the Presiding Arbitrator.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties, on instructions, submit that they will ensure that necessary procedure is carried out within a period of two (2) weeks from today.

In view thereof, the reliefs as sought in the present Petition may be canvassed by the Petitioner before the learned Arbitral Tribunal, as and when it enters upon the reference.

In view thereof, the present petition along with pending applications stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. FEBRUARY 20, 2026/tk/kr

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 24/02/2026 at 12:30:55