Under Section 11, the court’s inquiry is confined to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement.

The parties’ Work Order dated 12 February 2015 and Contract Agreement dated 10 July 2015 concerned the erection and commissioning package for the Feroz Gandhi Unchahar Thermal Power Project.

Clause 29 of the Work Order, read with Clause 24 of the General Conditions of Contract, provided for arbitration, with the arbitrator to be appointed by NBPPL’s General Manager.

After disputes arose, the petitioner invoked arbitration by notice dated 22 June 2026 under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The respondent did not appear despite service.

The petitioner sought appointment of an independent sole arbitrator under Section 11(6).

Whether the Court should appoint a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) where the arbitration agreement’s existence was undisputed.

Whether the disputes’ arbitrability or jurisdictional objections should be determined at the Section 11 stage or left to the arbitrator.

Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 limits the Court’s inquiry at the appointment stage to examining the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement, as stated in SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Krish Spinning, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1754.

Section 21 governs commencement of arbitral proceedings upon receipt of a request to refer the dispute to arbitration.

Section 12(2) requires the appointed arbitrator to make the requisite disclosure.

Under the parties’ arbitration clause, disputes were referable to arbitration under the 1996 Act, with Delhi as the venue.

The Court found that the contract contained a valid arbitration clause and that the petitioner had invoked it by notice; the respondent’s non-appearance did not displace the prima facie basis for appointment.

Applying the limited Section 11 inquiry, the Court appointed a sole arbitrator.

It left questions of arbitrability and jurisdiction for the arbitrator to decide, and clarified that its observations were not to influence the arbitration’s merits.

He was directed to enter upon the reference within two weeks and furnish the disclosure required by Section 12(2); the arbitration is to proceed under the rules and aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, with fees as per its schedule.

The petition and pending application(s) were disposed of.