$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 1814/2025 TATA CAPITAL LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Varun Kumar and Mr. Ragini Kapoor, Advs.

versus M/S CHETNA ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED.....Respondent Through: Mr. Ashok Chhaparia, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

% 16.12.2025

1. This is a petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for adjudication of disputes between the parties.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner advanced a loan under a Loan cum Guarantee Agreement dated 23.10.2023 for a sum of Rs. 2 crores vide sanction letter dated 23.10.2023.The Respondent defaulted in repaying the said loan amount.

3. The Loan cum Guarantee Agreement contains an arbitration clause being Clause 11 which reads as under:

“If any dispute, difference or claim arises between any of the Obligors and the Lender in connection with the Facility or as to the interpretation, validity, implementation or effect of the Facility Documents or as to the rights and liabilities of the parties under these T&Cs or-alleged breachof the Facility Documents oranything done or omitted to be done pursuant to the Facility Documents, the same shall be settled by arbitration by a sole arbitration to be appointedas pertheprocedurebelowandtobeheldatsuch place as agreed by the Parties in Serial No. 15 of Annexure 1 hereto of the Agreement. The Party invoking the arbitration ("Claimant") shall address a notice to the other Party ("Respondent'') suggesting the names of not more than three arbitrators, all of whom shall be either retiredjudgesoftheDistrictCourt,HighCourtortheSupremeCourt or a lawyer having minimum 10 years' relevant experience. The Respondent shall either:

(i) Confirm in writing acceptance of one amongst the proposed names as the sole arbitrator to the Claimant within a period of ten (10) days from the date of notice ("Notice Period',),' or (ii) Convey objection, if any, in writing to the Claimant, against the proposed names of the sole arbitrator within the said Notice Period.

However, if the Claimant does not receive any response from the Respondent within the said Notice Period, the Claimant shall be entitled to nominate any one person from amongst the proposed three names as the sole arbitrator and such arbitrator shall be deemed to be appointed by both the Parties.

In the event; the Respondent conveys its objection as per (ii) above then the sole arbitrator will be appointed by a Court having jurisdiction. The arbitration shall be conducted under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 together with its amendments, any statutory modifications or reenactment thereof for the time being in force. The arbitration proceeding shall be conducted in English language. The award of the arbitrator shall be final and bindingonallpartiesconcerned.Thecostofarbitrationshall be borne by the Obligors.”

4. Since the respondentdefaulted,thepetitioner issued Loan recall Notice cumNotice invoking arbitration on 16.09.2025 and thereafter filed the present petition.

5. Mr. Chhaparia, learned counsel for the respondent states that he does not object to the appointment of an Arbitrator.

6. I am satisfied that there exists a valid arbitration clause between the parties and there are disputes which need to be adjudicated through the arbitral mechanism.

7. For the said reasons, the petition is allowed and disposed of with the following directions:

i) Mr. Rakesh Dudeja, Advocate (Mob. No. 9810147798) is appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

ii) The arbitration will be held under the aegis and rules of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road, New Delhi (hereinafter, referred to as the ‘DIAC’).

iii) The remuneration of the learned Arbitrator shall be in terms of DIAC (Administrative Cost and Arbitrators’ Fees) Rules, 2018.

iv) The learned Arbitrator is requested to furni