NITESH SONI PROPRIETOR OF M S SONI ENTERPRISES v. M S ROLLING BUNS FOODS AND HOSPITALITY PRIVATE LTD
ARB.P./796/2026 · 2026-07-09
Subramonium Prasad
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 12133 (DEL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 12133 (DEL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 796/2026
NITESH SONI PROPRIETOR OF M S SONI ENTERPRISES .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Raghav Sehgal, Adv., for Petitioner
versus
M S ROLLING BUNS FOODS AND HOSPITALITY PRIVATE LTD
.....Respondent
Through: None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
O R D E R %
09.07.2026
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 arising under two Agreements i.e., Franchise Agreement and the Operations Agreement, both dated 28.03.2025 (hereinafter referred to as
“Agreements”). 2. It is stated that the Respondent was the successful bidder and secured the operational rights from Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) for setting up and operating a food kiosk at Lajpat Nagar Metro Station in the name and style of “Burger Monk”. 3. As per the Agreements entered into between the parties, the Petitioner was required to transfer a sum of Rs.15,08,000/- for operating the kiosk. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/07/2026 at 10:55:06
4. It is stated that despite paying the entire amount, the possession of the kiosk was not handed over to the Petitioner by the Respondent. It is stated that the Petitioner claimed a refund of the said amount from the Respondent, out of which only Rs.3,00,000/- has been refunded to the Petitioner and the balance amount of Rs. 12,08,000/- has yet not been refunded. 5. It is stated that since the Respondent failed to honour its commitments, a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, invoking arbitration was issued to the Respondent on 23.03.2026. 6. Operations Agreement contains an arbitration clause by which the parties have decided to get their disputes adjudicated through arbitration. The said clause specifically states that the seat of the arbitration shall be at Delhi. 7. It is stated that a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act was issued on 23.03.2026, which, according to the Petitioner, has been duly served on the Respondent. 8. Notice was issued in the present petition on 04.05.2026.
The office report indicates that the Respondent has been served on 17.06.2026 at the given address, and the service was refused by the Respondent's employee. In the opinion of this Court, service is complete on the Respondent. 9. Despite service, there is no appearance on behalf of the Respondent. 10. Accordingly, Ms. Radhika Roy, Advocate, (Mob No: 9650605676) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties. 11. The arbitration would take place under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) and would be subject to its rules and regulations. The learned Arbitrator shall be entitled to fees as per the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/07/2026 at 10:55:06
Schedule of Fees maintained by the DIAC. 12. The learned Arbitrator is also requested to file the requisite disclosure under Section 12(2) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, within three weeks of entering reference. 13. 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. 14. Needless to state, nothing in this Order shall be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the contentions of the parties. 15. The present Petition stands disposed of in the above terms along with pending application(s), if any. SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J JULY 09, 2026 hsk
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/07/2026 at 10:55:06