Star Orechem International Private Limited vs Council Of Scientific And Industrial Research Csir And Anr

$~11
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
% Date of Decision: 16 October, 2026
# CNR No. DLHC010454762026
+ ARB.P. 1699/2026
STAR ORECHEM INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED
.....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Nakul Mohta, Mr. Hitesh Nagar
and Ms. Saijal Arora, Advocates

versus

COUNCIL OF SCIENTIFIC AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH CSIR
AND ANR .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Kishor Madke, Advocate for
CSIR with Ms. Samira Kulkarni,
Administrative Officer, CSIR, NCL,
Pune
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
J U D G M E N T (oral)
I.A. 26278/2026 (for exemption)
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
ARB.P. 1699/2026

1. Petition has been filed under Sections 11(5) and 11(6) of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of Sole
Arbitrator.
2. According to petitioner, the disputes emanate from the failure of the
continuous-process technology for manufacture of azelaic acid and
prelargonic acid licensed by the respondents to the petitioners. According to
them, in four successive demonstrations conducted by the respondents,
Signature Not Verified
1
ARB.P. 1699/2026

Digitally Signed
By:SONIA THAPLIYAL
Signing Date:17.10.2026
15:05:44

respondents themselves admitted in writing about the malfunction and
deterioration of their critical equipment which has given rise to the claim of
the petitioners, seeking refund of the knowhow fees, damages and
consequential reliefs.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes reference to the Licensing
Agreement dated 13.03.2023 which also contains arbitration clause i.e. clause
21.
4. According to petitioners, they have complied with the procedure
contemplated under Clause-21 and the disputes were notified in writing but
those remained unresolved for well over 60 days and thereafter notice for
invocation of arbitration was sent to the respondents. As per their reply
dated 23.06.2026, respondents denied having committed any breach of
agreement in question and have, rather, asked the petitioner to withdraw legal
notice in question.
5. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner seeks refund of
the license fee as well as damages.
6. Mr. Kishor Madke, learned counsel representing CSIR has joined the
proceedings through videoconferencing. Ms. Samira Kulkarni,
Administrative Officer, CISR, NCL, Pune has also joined the proceedings
through videoconferencing. They submit that their reply is under
preparation and they seek short adjournment.
7. Fact, however, remains that notice sent by the petitioner was duly
responded by the respondent through Mr. Kishor Madke, Advocate and while
replying to the notice, the respondents have, categorically, averred that they
were not responsible for any breach of the technology transfer agreement or
licensing terms .
Signature Not Verified
2
ARB.P. 1699/2026

Digitally Signed
By:SONIA THAPLIYAL
Signing Date:17.10.2026
15:05:44

8. The point before this Court is short and precise one.
9. Petitioner merely seeks appointment of Arbitrator.
10. There is no denying the fact that agreement in question contains
arbitration clause. There is no dispute with respect to the fact that as per
agreement, the Venue of the arbitration has been agreed as Delhi and as per
Clause-21, parties have also agreed that disputes shall be settled through
arbitration and shall be referred to Delhi International Arbitration Centre,
High Court of Delhi .
11. In view of the above, the petition stands disposed of with the following
directions:-
i) The disputes between the parties, concerning said Agreement are
referred to arbitration.
ii) Mr. Vinay Kumar Gupta, Former District & Sessions Judge,
Delhi (Mobile No. 9910384701) is appointed Arbitrator to adjudicate
the same.
iii) The arbitration will be held under the aegis of Delhi
International Arbitration Centre , New Delhi (DIAC) and would be
governed by the Rules of DIAC. The fee of the Arbitrator shall be
fixed as per fee schedule under DIAC (Administrative Cost and
Arbitrator’s fees) Rules 2018.
iv) Declaration in terms of Section 12 of the Act be furnished prior
to entering into the reference.
v) It is made clear that all the rights and contentions of the parties,
including as to the arbitrability of the claim and any other preliminary
objections as well as merits of claim or counter-claim, if any, are left
Signature Not Verified
3
ARB.P. 1699/2026

Digitally Signed
By:SONIA THAPLIYAL
Signing Date:17.10.2026
15:05:44

open for adjudication by the learned Arbitrator.
vi) The parties shall approach DIAC within two weeks from today.

(MANOJ JAIN)
JUDGE
OCTOBER 16, 2026/ dr/sy

Signature Not Verified
4
ARB.P. 1699/2026

Digitally Signed
By:SONIA THAPLIYAL
Signing Date:17.10.2026
15:05:44