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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 20895

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Aparesh Kumar Singh, CJ
M/s. Next Education India Pvt. Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Rahimkhan Unity High School – Respondent
ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.218 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: G. Premgopal Reddy
For the Respondents:

The Court may appoint an independent arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, when a valid arbitration agreement exists and the respondent fails to appear or agree on an arbitrator after the clause is invoked.

Headnote:The applicant approached the court under Section 11(5) and (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking the appointment of an arbitrator following a dispute arising from Master Licence Agreements - Teachnext. Despite the issuance of notices, the respondent failed to appear, leading the court to propose the appointment of an independent arbitrator. The primary issue was whether the requirements for the court to exercise its jurisdiction for the appointment of an arbitrator were satisfied. The court observed that an agreement existed between the parties providing for arbitration and that the applicant had duly invoked the arbitration clause, thereby justifying the appointment of an independent arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes. The Arbitration Application is, accordingly, disposed of.

Table of Content
1. invocation of arbitration jurisdiction due to existence of agreement and respondent's non-appearance. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. confirmation and appointment of an independent arbitrator upon receipt of consent and declaration. (Para 4 , 5)
3. administrative directions regarding arbitrator fees, timelines, and disposal of the application. (Para 6 , 7)

ORDER:

Heard Mr. G. Premgopal Reddy, learned counsel for the applicant.

2. By order dated 12.06.2026, this Court proposed to appoint Sri D. Ravindra Sharma, Retired District Judge, as an independent Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. The order dated 12.06.2026 is extracted hereunder for easy reference:

“Mr. Gudipati Premgopal Reddy, learned counsel appears for applicants. Under the Master Licence Agreements - Teachnext, the applicants undertook to provide services to the respondents. But, disputes arose between the parties. As such, the applicants had invoked arbitration clause No.11.10 of the aforesaid agreements by issuing a notice proposing the name of an arbitrator. The respondents had failed to furnish reply. Therefore, the applicants had approached this Court. Notices were issued upon the respondents vide orders dated 14.11.2025 and 21.11.2025. Despite service of notice, the respondents had not entered appearance. Learned counsel for the applicants therefore submits that since the ingredients for invocation of the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 11(5) and (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, are made out, this Court may proceed to appoint an arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants. It appears that an agreement exists between the parties which provide for adjudication of the disputes arising under the agreements through arbitration. The applicants after issuance of notice invoking the arbitration clause had approached this Court for appointment of an arbitrator. In the present matters, after notice, the respondents had not entered appearance. Therefore, this Court proposes to appoint Sri D. Ravindra Sharma, Retired District Judge (Resident of Flat No.201, H.No.13-10-95, Vaishnavi Apartments, New Gaddiannaram, Hyderabad-500060; Mobile No.9848790929), as an independent arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. It is made clear that all questions of law and fact are left open to be raised before the learned Arbitrator in respect of the disputes arising under the agreements between the parties. The proposed arbitrator is requested to submit his consent and a declaration in terms of Section 12(1) read with Schedule VI of the Act. Registry is directed to communicate this order to the proposed arbitrator. The matters be listed after three weeks with the response, if any, of the proposed arbitrator.”

3. The proposed Arbitrator has submitted his consent along with a declaration under Section 12(1) read with Schedule VI of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, ‘the Act’) by letter dated 22.06.2026.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant, therefore, submits that appointment of the proposed Arbitrator may be confirmed.

5. In that view of the matter, I hereby appoint Sri D. Ravindra Sharma, Retired District Judge (Resident of Flat No.201, H.No.13-10-95, Vaishnavi Apartments, New Gaddiannaram, Hyderabad-500060; Mobile No. 9848790929), to act as an independent Arbitrator in respect of the dispute between the parties.

6. Registry is directed to serve a xerox copy of the entire pleadings to the learned Arbitrator. The learned Arbitrator is requested to keep in mind the fee prescribed in Schedule IV of the Act and the time limit prescribed under Section 29A of the Act.

7. The Arbitration Application is, accordingly, disposed of.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

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 Back to top