Delhi High Court
ARB.P./1086/2026 of J.P.G. ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. Vs ENGINEERING PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD on 16 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010287422026 + ARB.P. 1086/2026 & I.A. 17347/2026 J.P.G. ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Bipin Kumar Prabhat, Mr. Kislaya Prabhat, Mr. Ashok Kumar Verma and Ms. Rinku Kumari, Advocates. versus ENGINEERING PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD
$~9
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CNR No. DLHC010287422026
+
ARB.P. 1086/2026 & I.A. 17347/2026
J.P.G. ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.
.....Petitioner
Through:
Mr. Bipin Kumar Prabhat, Mr.
Kislaya Prabhat, Mr. Ashok Kumar
Verma and Ms. Rinku Kumari,
Advocates.
versus
ENGINEERING PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD
.....Respondent
Through:
Mr. Uttam Datt, Sr. Advocate with
Ms. Sonakshi Singh, Mr. Naman
Kumar and Mr. Katyayani Shekhar,
Advocates.
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
%
16.09.2026
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 Contract Agreement dated 25.01.2024.
2. It is stated that under the Contract Agreement, the Petitioner was awarded a contract for construction of 2nd Laboratory Building for Translational Health Science and Technology Institute (hereinafter referred to as the “THSTI”) at Faridabad, Haryana (hereinafter referred to as the “Project”).
3. Clause 76 of the Contract Agreement contains an arbitration clause. However, since there were disputes regarding execution of the Project, a Tripartite Contractual Settlement Agreement dated 11.02.2026 was entered into between the THSTI, the Petitioner and the Respondent.
4. The recital of the Tripartite Contractual Settlement Agreement dated 11.02.2026 is reproduced as under:- “12. All Parties mutually agreed that continuation of the existing contract for the revised Scope may lead to unintended delays, cost implications, and potential noncompliance, and therefore it is in the collective interest of all Parties to conclude the current contract through an amicable and lawful settlement.
13. All three Parties have mutually agreed to close the Contract Agreement through amicable Settlement, without dispute, arbitration or legal proceedings.
16. The Parties confirm that the discontinuation of the remaining contract work is being undertaken without any fault, deficiency, non-performance or breach on the part of the Contractor, but solely due to the First Party's updated project requirements. (Emphasis Supplied)”
5. Similarly, Clause „A‟ and „H‟ is reproduced as under:- “A. Foreclosure of Contract
i) The Contract shall stand foreclosed with immediate effect under the provisions of Clause 58 of the GCC.
ii) The foreclosure is First Party-initiated, arising out of change in specifications and curtailment of the originally tendered scope of work.
H. Governing Law and Jurisdiction
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of India.
Courts at New Delhi shall have exclusive jurisdiction.”
6. In view of the above, the Contract Agreement dated 25.01.2024 has come to an end and the Tripartite Contractual Settlement Agreement dated 11.02.2026 does not contain an arbitration clause, and therefore, the present petition cannot be entertained by this Court.
7. In view of the absence of the arbitration clause, the present Petition is dismissed along with pending application(s), if any.
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J SEPTEMBER 16, 2026 Prateek