SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 1410

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MS. SUMITA BANU – Appellant
Versus
SMT LALITA RATHI – Respondent


$~75 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 23.01.2026 + ARB.P. 1918/2025 MS. SUMITA BANU .....Petitioner Through: Mr. N U Ahmed & Mr. Anil Kumar Yadav, Advs.

versus SMT LALITA RATHI .....Respondent Through: Dr. Anurag Bhardwaj, Mr.

Prabhu Saxena & Ms. Devyani, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR % JUDGEMENT (ORAL)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [“the Act”], seeking the appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties arising out of the Service Agreement dated 11.03.2025 [“Agreement”].

2. The said Agreement contains an Arbitration Clause, being Clause 6, which reads as under:

6. Dispute Resolution:

In the event of any dispute under this Agreement, the same shall be amicably settled between the Parties. If any dispute is not settled amicably, the same shall be referred to the sole arbitrator to be appointed mutually by both the Parties. The award given by the Arbitrator shall be final and binding on both the Parties. The language of Arbitral Proceedings shall be English. This arbitration Signature Not Verified shall be governed by The Arbitratio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top