Pacific Maintenance Services Private Limited vs Additional Technique Hair And Beauty

$~J
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%
Judgment pronounced on: 16.10.2026
# CNR No.DLHC010319852026
ARB.P. 1208/2026
+
PACIFIC MAINTENANCE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED
.....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Adil Vasudeva, Ms. Jigyasa
Prashar, Advs. and Mr. Sanjay K.
Chauhan, AR.
versus

ADDITIONAL TECHNIQUE HAIR AND BEAUTY.....Respondent
Through: Advocate (appearance not given)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA
JUDGMENT


1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Sections


11(5) and 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter
referred to as “ the A&C Act ”) seeking appointment of an independent Sole
Arbitrator in terms of Article 12 of the Maintenance and Services
Agreement dated 10.04.2024 (hereinafter referred to as “ the MSA ”) executed
between the parties.
2. The petitioner/ Pacific Maintenance Services Private Limited, is a
company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and
is engaged in providing maintenance services in respect of common areas,
facilities and infrastructure of commercial properties, including Pacific Mall,
Sahibabad.
Signature Not Verified
ARB.P. 1208/2026 Page 1 of 5

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:16.10.2026
20:14:28

3. Respondent no.1, M/s Additional Technique Hair and Beauty, is a
proprietorship concern of which Ms. Meenu is the sole proprietor.
Respondent no.1 is stated to be the occupant of Shop No. UB-3B, Upper
Basement Floor, Pacific Mall, Ghaziabad, whereas the respondent no.2/ Ms.
Rajni Nainani is the allottee/ absolute owner of the said premises.
4. The respondents had entered into a License Agreement dated
28.03.2024 in respect of the aforesaid premises. Pursuant thereto, the
petitioner entered into the MSA dated 10.04.2024 with the respondents,
whereunder the petitioner was engaged for providing and funding
maintenance services in respect of the common areas, facilities and
infrastructure of the said mall.
5. Under Article 5 of the MSA, the respondents were liable to pay the
maintenance charges as stipulated therein. Article 7 further provided for
payment of the maintenance charges within the prescribed timelines,
together with interest, in case of any delay. In terms of Article 7.10, the
liability of respondent nos.1 and 2 towards payment of maintenance and
other charges was agreed to be joint and several. The said Article reads as
under:
“7.10. In case the OCCUPANT fails to pay any charges including but not
limited to CAM/ Electricity / Rentals or any other dues related the
Premise , the same shall be payable by Allottee to the Maintenance
Agency / Developer. Further, without prejudice to other rights, the
Maintenance agency/ Developer is entitled to recover such charges from
the Allotte / Occupant by initiating necessary action including
disconnection of electricity as per provisions mentioned in this
agreement. The Allottee/Occupant shall be jointly and severally liable
and responsible towards payment of all such dues to the Maintenance
agency.”
Signature Not Verified
ARB.P. 1208/2026 Page 2 of 5

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:16.10.2026
20:14:28

6. Disputes have arisen between the parties on account of alleged non-
payment of maintenance and utility charges. It is the case of the petitioner,
that, as on 18.04.2026, a sum of Rs.4,53,360.58/- was outstanding towards
maintenance and utility charges, exclusive of interest. Despite repeated
demands and a formal legal notice dated 20.04.2026, the alleged dues were
not cleared by the respondents.
7. Since the disputes could not be amicably resolved, the petitioner
invoked arbitration by notice dated 25.05.2026 under Article 12 of the MSA
and called upon the respondent to consent to the appointment of one of the
three proposed retired Additional District Judges as the Sole Arbitrator. The
notice granted 30 days for conveying such consent. The said period expired
on 25.06.2026 without any response or consent from the respondent,
resulting in the filing of the present petition.
8. Article 12 of the MSA, which contains the arbitration agreement
between the parties, reads as under:
“ARTICLE 12: ARBITRATION
12.1 All disputes, difference or disagreement arising out of, in connection
with or in relation to this Agreement shall be mutually discussed and
settled between the Parties.
12.2 All disputes, difference or disagreement arising out of, in connection
with or in relation to this Agreement, which cannot be amicably settled
shall be finally decided by arbitration to be held in accordance with the
provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Any arbitration
pursuant hereunder shall be a domestic arbitration under the applicable
law.
12.3 The venue of arbitration shall be Delhi and the language of
arbitration shall be English.”
9. The existence of the arbitration agreement is evident from a bare
perusal of Article 12 of the MSA. The disputes raised by the petitioner arise
Signature Not Verified
ARB.P. 1208/2026 Page 3 of 5

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:16.10.2026
20:14:28

out of the contractual obligations contained in the MSA and are, therefore,
prima facie referable to arbitration. The pre-arbitration requirement of
mutual discussion and settlement having failed, and the respondent having
failed to concur in the appointment of a Sole Arbitrator despite invocation of
the arbitration clause, the occasion for constitution of the arbitral tribunal
has arisen.
10. At this stage, this Court is required to undertake the limited
examination contemplated under Section 11 of the A&C Act. The existence
of a valid arbitration agreement being apparent from the MSA, and there
being no impediment to reference of the disputes to arbitration, the petition
merits consideration.
11. Since the existence of the arbitration clause is evident from a bare
perusal of the contract, there is no impediment to constituting an arbitral
tribunal for adjudicating the disputes between the parties, as mandated in
terms of the judgments of Supreme Court in SBI General Insurance Co.
Ltd. v. Krish Spinning , (2024) 12 SCC 1 and Interplay Between Arbitration
Agreements under Arbitration Act, 1996 & Stamp Act, 1899, In re , (2024)
6 SCC 1. The said legal position has also been subsequently reiterated and
followed by the Supreme Court in Aslam Ismail Khan Deshmukh v. ASAP
Fluids Private Limited & Anr. , (2025) 1 SCC 502 and Maharashtra State
Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. & Ors. v. R Z Malpani , 2026 SCC OnLine
SC 553.
12. Further, in view of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in
TRF Limited v. Energo Engineering Projects Ltd., (2017) 8 SCC 377,
Perkins Eastman Architects DPC v. HSCC (India) Ltd., (2020) 20 SCC
760, and Bharat Broadband Network Limited v. United Telecoms Limited,
Signature Not Verified
ARB.P. 1208/2026 Page 4 of 5

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:16.10.2026
20:14:28

2019 SCC OnLine SC 547, it is incumbent on this Court to appoint an
independent sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.
13. Accordingly, Mr. Naman Joshi, Advocate (Mob. No. 9810057280), is
appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the
parties arising out of the MSA dated 10.04.2024.
14. The learned Sole Arbitrator may proceed with the arbitration
proceedings subject to furnishing to the parties requisite disclosures as
required under section 12 of the A&C Act, and in the event there is any
impediment to the appointment on that count, the parties are given liberty to
file an appropriate application in this Court.
15. It is agreed between the parties that the arbitration shall take place
under the aegis of and as per the rules of Delhi International Arbitration
Centre (DIAC).
16. All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the
claims/counter-claims are kept open, to be decided by the learned Arbitrator
on merits, in accordance with law.
17. Needless to say, nothing in this order shall be construed as an
expression of opinion of this court on the merits of the contentions of the
parties

18. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

SACHIN DATTA, J
OCTOBER 16, 2026 /at/ka

Signature Not Verified
ARB.P. 1208/2026 Page 5 of 5

Digitally Signed
By:ABHISHEK THAKUR
Signing Date:16.10.2026
20:14:28