Advocate OS
Start free

High Court of Delhi · 14 Oct 2026

ARB.P./1549/2026 of KUMAR VIHAAN Vs NARAYAN BAHIRU PAWAR & ANR.

Headnote · Arbitration Law · Appointment of Arbitrators

Where parties to petitions under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, mutually agree upon their respective nominee arbitrators pursuant to the arbitration clauses in the Buy-Back Agreements, the Court disposes of the petitions by recording the agreement and requesting the two nominated arbitrators to appoint the presiding arbitrator in accordance with law under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre. 1112

  • Petitions under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of arbitrators under Buy-Back Agreements containing arbitration clauses for a three-member Tribunal, can be disposed of by consent when parties agree on their respective nominee arbitrators. 4791011
  • The two nominated arbitrators are requested to appoint the presiding arbitrator in accordance with law, with the arbitrations to be conducted under the aegis and rules of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre. 11

Arbitration petition — Appointment of arbitrators — Buy-Back Agreements — Consensus between parties — Nominated arbitrators · Appointment of presiding arbitrator — Delhi International Arbitration Centre — Conduct of arbitration

Headnote written by AI; each point names the paragraphs it rests on. Read them before you rely on it.

  1. Headnote 1

    ARB.P. 1549/2026 & Connected Matter $~25&26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010407372026 + ARB.P. 1549/2026 KUMAR VIHAAN .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Sonal Alagh, Advocate. versus NARAYAN BAHIRU PAWAR & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Abhishek Vikram, Ms. Vasundhra Chauhan & Mr. Nirmal, Advocates for R-1 Appearance not given for R-2.

  2. Headnote 2

    # CNR No. DLHC010407392026 + ARB.P. 1550/2026 KUMAR VIHAAN .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Sonal Alagh, Advocate. versus RUTUJA GIRISH PAWAR & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Abhishek Vikram, Ms. Vasundhra Chauhan & Mr. Nirmal, Advocates for R-1. Appearance not given for R-2. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN O R D E R %

  3. Headnote 3

    14.10.2026

  4. Para 1

    By way of these two petitions, under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [“the Act”], the petitioner seeks appointment of arbitrators, to adjudicate disputes arising between the 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 16/10/2026 at 11:03:13 ARB.P. 1549/2026 & Connected Matter parties under similar Buy-Back Agreements, both dated 16.11.2022 [“the Agreements”].

  5. Para 2

    I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

  6. Para 3

    The petitioner is common to both petitions, as is respondent No.2 - Arthmatetech Private Limited, [hereinafter, “the Company”]. The Agreements contemplate buy-back of shares in the Company, which are held by two individuals, each of whom is impleaded as respondent No. 1 in these two petitions.

  7. Para 4

    The Agreements contain identical arbitration clauses [Clause 11.3], which provide for adjudication of disputes by arbitration of a three- member Tribunal, with one member to be appointed by the “Investor” [respondent No. 1 in both petitions], and another to be appointed by the petitioner and the Company jointly. The clauses contemplate that the two nominated arbitrators would jointly appoint the third arbitrator, who shall act as the presiding arbitrator. Under the Agreements, New Delhi has been designated as the venue and the seat of the arbitration, and Courts in New Delhi have been vested with exclusive jurisdiction.

  8. Para 5

    The arbitration clause was invoked by the petitioner through separate legal notices dated 02.07.2026, addressed to respondent No. 1 in both petitions.

  9. Para 6

    Although the notices contemplated appointment of Mr. Aslam Ahmed, Advocate, as the sole arbitrator, having regard to the terms of the Agreements, Ms. Sonal Alagh, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned counsel for the Company, state that Mr. Aslam Ahmed, Advocate, may be regarded as their nominee arbitrator in both matters.

  10. Para 7

    Mr. Abhishek Vikram, learned counsel for respondent No.1, upon 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 16/10/2026 at 11:03:13 ARB.P. 1549/2026 & Connected Matter instructions from respondent No.1 in both petitions, submits that Hon’ble Ms. Justice Usha Mehra (Retd.), former Acting Chief Justice of this Court, has consented to act as the nominee arbitrator of respondent No. 1 in both matters.

  11. Para 8

    In view of the above, learned counsel for the parties agree that no arbitral appointment is required by this Court, and the two nominated arbitrators be requested to appoint the presiding arbitrator, in accordance with law. It is also stated by them that the arbitrations may be conducted under the aegis and rules of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, including as to the remuneration of the learned Arbitrators.

  12. Para 9

    Accordingly, the petition is disposed of, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties.

  13. Para 10

    Needless to say, in the event of any difficulty with regard to the appointment of the presiding arbitrator, the parties may approach this Court afresh under Section 11 of the Act. PRATEEK JALAN, J OCTOBER 14, 2026 da/SM/ 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 16/10/2026 at 11:03:13