$~64 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 468/2025 KLEIO SOLAR POWER PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. Mr.

Jayant Mehta, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Kumar Kislay, Ms. Anjali Anchayil Ms. Ridhima Sharma and Mr. Krisna Gambhir, Advs.

versus VESTAS WIND TECHNOLOGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr.

Rajshekhar Rao, Sr. Adv. with Mr.

Sulabh Rewari, Ms. Mansi Binjrajka, Ms. Ishita Jain, Ms. Smriti Nair, Mr.

Darpan Sachdeva, Mr. Zahid, Mr.

Harshil and Mr. Abeer Malik, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

% 18.11.2025

1. This is a petition filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, among others, seeking the following reliefs:

“a) direct the Respondent to not act on the demand raised vide Invoice Nos. 0807000096 dated July 18, 2025, 807000098 dated August 06, 2025, 807000103 dated September 02, 2025, 807000107 dated October 10, 2025, and 807000108 dated November 01, 2025 issued by the Respondent under the Service and Energy Based Availability Agreement dated March 29, 2024;

b) stay the operation and effect of the notice of suspension dated November 01, 2025 issued by the Respondent;

c) direct the Respondent to continue operation and maintenance of the Wind Turbine Generators under the Service and Energy Based Availability Agreement dated March 29, 2024;

d) direct the Respondent to immediately resume the provision· of services under the Service and Energy Based Availability Agreement dated March 29, 2024;”

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had to develop a 209.4 MW Hybrid Solar-Wind Power Project with 104.4 MW as wind component and 105 MW as solar component.

3. For the development of the said wind component, the petitioner and the respondent entered into several agreements. The first agreement being a Supply Contract dated 21.03.2023 under which the respondent had to supply 29 Wind Turbine Generators (“WTGs”) to the petitioner.

4. Post commissioning, the parties entered into Service and Energy Based Availability Agreement (“O&M Contract”) dated 29.03.2024 which pertained to operation and maintenance services to be provided by the respondent for WTGs. Under the said O&M Contract, the respondent was entitled to interim fee from the date first WTG was commissioned till the last WTG is commissioned.

5. After commissioning of last WTG, annual service fee provided under the O&M Contract was to be payable, putting an end to the interim fee. There is a moratorium of two years for the annual services.

6. Mr. Sethi, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, states that the petitioner has already commissioned 28 WTGs and 29^th WTG could not be commissioned due to the acts of the respondent.

7. The same is disputed by Mr. Sibal, learned senior counsel for the respondent, stating that 29^th WTG is being commissioned.

8. The said Supply Contract contains an arbitration clause being Clause No. 33 and the said O&M contract contains an arbitration clause being Clause No. 13. Clause No. 13 being relevant for this petition reads as under:

“13. GOVERNING LAW & DISPUTE RESOLUTION ……..

13.4 Dispute Resolution …….

(f) If, in case of a Technical Dispute, the matter is not resolved by the Expert, and in other cases as per negotiations under this Clause 13.4 [Dispute Resolution], then either Party may refer such Dispute to arbitration in accordance with Clause 13.4(g) below. However, if the resolution provided by the Expert is acceptable to both Parties, then it will be final and binding for both Parties.

(g) The arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (as amended), in effect as on the date of commencement of such arbitration. The venue and seat of arbitration shall be New Delhi. The arbitral tribunal shall comprise of a sole arbitrator mutually appointed by both the Parties. The language of such arbitration shall be English.

(h) The Parties agree that the arbitration award, mater