Delhi High Court

Appointment of Independent Arbitrator Justified Upon Failure to Respond to Notice and Non-Dispute of Arbitration Agreement

Mr. Idu vs Haji Abrar & Ors.

Delhi High CourtJUDGMENT: July 10, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The Petitioner seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator filed this petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Conciliation Act, 1996

Source reference: p. 1

The disputes arose from the affairs of a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) incorporated via an agreement dated 11.04.2023

Source reference: p. 1

The Petitioner was subsequently inducted as a partner through a supplementary agreement dated 04.09.2023

Source reference: p. 1

Following disputes, the Petitioner invoked the arbitration clause (Clause 63 of the original agreement) via a legal notice dated 29.01.2026

Source reference: p. 1-2

The Respondents failed to appoint an arbitrator or respond to the notice within the statutory period, leading to the present filing

Source reference: p. 6
02

Issues

1. Whether a sole arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Conciliation Act, 1996, to adjudicate disputes arising from the LLP Agreement

Source reference: p. 1 / para. 1
03

Law Applied

Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Conciliation Act, 1996, which empowers the High Court to appoint an arbitrator when a party fails to act as required under an appointment procedure

Source reference: p. 1

Section 12 of the Act regarding mandatory disclosures relating to the independence and impartiality of the arbitrator

Source reference: p. 7
04

Reasoning

The court noted that the existence of the arbitration agreement (Clause 63) was not in dispute between the parties

Source reference: p. 1, 6

Clause 63 specifically provided that all disputes between partners or the LLP that could not be resolved amicably be referred to arbitration under the 1996 Act

Source reference: p. 1

During the hearing, the counsel for both the Petitioner and Respondents reached a consensus that an independent sole arbitrator should be appointed to resolve the pending disputes

Source reference: p. 6

Consequently, the court found it unnecessary to delve into the merits of the disputes and focused on facilitating the agreed-upon appointment while reserving the Respondents' rights to contest jurisdiction or arbitrability before the appointed tribunal

Source reference: p. 6, 7
05

Holding

The court allowed the petition and appointed Mr. Syed Mehdi Imam, Advocate, as the Sole Arbitrator

The arbitration will be conducted under the aegis and rules of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC)

Source reference: p. 7

The arbitrator is required to file a disclosure under Section 12 of the Act

Source reference: p. 7

The court held that all preliminary objections regarding jurisdiction and merits remain open for the arbitrator's determination

Source reference: p. 7

The petition was disposed of accordingly

Source reference: p. 7
Delhi High Court

Original Court PDF

Mr. IduvsHaji Abrar & Ors.

Delhi High Court · July 10, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment