JUDGMENT :

[Sachin Datta, J.]

1. None appears for the respondent, despite service. Even on the last date of hearing, there was no appearance on the part of the respondent.

2. The present petition seeks appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. It is contended that the respondent approached the petitioner to avail its services i.e. use of co-working spaces and other ancillary services such as internet connection, data security, assets security and surveillance, firewall, furniture, maintenance, electricity and power back-up, etc. at its premises referred to in the petition.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner accepted the membership application, after the respondent duly filled and submitted the petitioner’s company’s ‘Joining Form’, agreeing to utilize 44 seats in one team room in the aforementioned premises from 10.03.2022, on the prescribed terms and conditions stipulated therein.

4. The “Terms of Use” which were in a hyperlink contained in the “Joining Form”, were agreed upon by the respondent while submitting the said ‘Joining Form’. The said “Terms of Use” contain an arbitration clause in the following terms:

“20. Governing Law and Jurisdiction

The Agreement and Terms of Use shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, laws of India. The Courts at New Delhi shall have the exclusive jurisdiction to entertain any dispute arising out of or in any manner concerning the Agreement and Terms of Use to the exclusion of the other Courts.

21. Arbitration

- Notwithstanding anything contained in the Agreement or the Terms of Use, any dispute arising out of or in connection with the Agreement or Terms of Use shall be sought to be resolved and settled amicably within 30 (thirty) days of such dispute arising, failing which the dispute shall be referred to and finally resolved by a sole arbitrator. The Parties agree that in the event of a dispute which needs to be resolved by arbitration, the arbitrator shall be appointed by Alf F, provided that there shall be no conflict of interest for the chosen arbitrator with either party. The cost of the arbitration shall be borne equally by the Parties. The provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 shall remain applicable.

- All proceedings in any such arbitration shall be conducted in English. The seat of the arbitration proceedings shall be in Delhi and the award of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the Parties.”

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the following judgments to contend that the arbitration clause contained in the “Terms of Use”, electronically submitted and agreed upon by the respondent, can be validly invoked by the petitioner:

(i) Shakti Bhog Foods Ltd. Vs. Kola Shipping Ltd. 2008 SCC OnLine SC 1447;

(ii) Trimex International FZE Limited, Dubai vs. Vedanta Aluminum Limited, India, 2010 SCC On Line SC 214;

(iii) Vidya Drolia and Ors., vs. Durga Trading Corporation, in Civil Appeal No.2402/2019 (SC);

(iv) Oyo Hotels and Homes Private Limited vs. Ace Hospitality and Allied Services & Anr. In Arb.P. 66/2021 (DHC); and

(v) Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Mohit Raghuram Hegde Proprietor Creative Infotech, in Commercial Arbitration Application No.235/2021 (BHC).

6. In Oyo Hotels (Supra), it has been held by this court as under:

“2. By the said agreement, the petitioner claims to have agreed to provide marketing and operational consulting services to the respondents’ hotel (Ace Inn, Kanakapura Rd, Karnataka- 562109). Mr. Advait Ghosh, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the MOCA was digitally signed by the respondent on 13.03.2019. He relies upon Clause 15 thereof (at page 12 of petitioner’s list of documents) to submit that the MOCA was to be governed by the Terms and Conditions published on the petitioner’s website. The Terms and Conditions published on the petitioner’s website have also been placed on record. Clause 14 of the said Terms and Conditions incorporate a dispute reso