Delhi High Court
ARB.P./2026/2025 of M/S SURYA MAINTENANCE AGENCY PVT LTD Vs SANYAM GOSAIN & ORS. on 17 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010967322025 + ARB.P. 2026/2025 M/S SURYA MAINTENANCE AGENCY PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Utsav Garg and Ms. Samvartika Pathak, Advocates. versus SANYAM GOSAIN & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sudhir Kumar Gupta, Advocate CORAM:
$~2
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CNR No. DLHC010967322025
+
ARB.P. 2026/2025
M/S SURYA MAINTENANCE AGENCY PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Utsav Garg and Ms. Samvartika
Pathak, Advocates.
versus
SANYAM GOSAIN & ORS.
.....Respondents
Through:
Mr. Sudhir Kumar Gupta, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
%
17.09.2026
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the Petitioner seeking appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties under a Maintenance Agreement dated 01.09.2011 (hereinafter referred to as the “Agreement”).
2. It is the case of the Petitioner that the Respondents are the owners of the commercial space/unit/office bearing No. 317-B, on third floor, having a covered area of approximately 1200 Sq. Feet i.e., super area of 2000.00 Sq. Feet in the building named “City Centre”, at Plot No. 1B3, Twin District Centre, Sector-10, Rohini, Delhi.
3. It is stated that the Petitioner who is the maintenance agency entered into an Maintenance Agreement dated 01.09.2011 with the Respondents.
4. It is stated that disputes have arisen between the parties regarding failure on the part of the Respondents to make timely payments of the maintenance charges to the Petitioner.
5. It is stated that the Clause 20 read with Clause 21 of the Agreement dated 01.09.2011 contains an arbitration clause. The said clause specifically states that the place of the arbitration shall be at Delhi. Since the disputes arose between the parties, a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 invoking arbitration was sent to the Respondents on 31.10.2025. The said Notice has not been replied to by the Respondents.
6. Notice in the present Petition was issued on 03.12.2025. It is pertinent to note that Respondents have been appearing on the previous dates, however, despite seeking time, no reply has been filed by the Respondents till today.
7. In view of the fact that disputes have arisen between the parties and the Agreement contains an arbitration clause, this Court is inclined to appoint an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties.
8. Accordingly, Ms. Rachna Srivastava, Sr. Adv. (Mob. No: 9811152039) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties.
9. The arbitration would take place under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) and would abide by its rules and regulations. The learned Arbitrator shall be entitled to fees as per the Schedule of Fees maintained by the DIAC.
10. The learned Arbitrator is also requested to file the requisite disclosure under Section 12(2) of the 1996 Act within two weeks of entering on reference.
11. All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the claims/counter-claims are kept open, to be decided by the learned Arbitrator on their merits, in accordance with law.
12. Needless to say, nothing in this order shall be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the contentions of the parties.
13. The Petition stands disposed of in the above terms, along with pending application(s), if any. SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J SEPTEMBER 17, 2026 Prateek