ARB.P. 428/2026 $~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 428/2026 & I.A. 6642/2026 PROMAX POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhishek Kakker and Mr. Vaibhav Kaul, Advs. versus SALASAR TECHNO ENGINEERING LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr. Inderjeet Singh and Ms. Yashmita, Advs CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD O R D E R % 17.07.2026 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 11(5) & (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 Purchase Order dated 03.09.2025 (hereinafter referred to as “Purchase Order”) issued by the Petitioner to the Respondent for manufacture and supply of steel lattice structures for an RVNL project. 2. It is the case of the Petitioner that the Respondent has not dispatched the materials within the timelines as agreed upon between the parties resulting in dispute arising between the parties. It is stated that, thereafter, the Petitioner on 13.12.2025 issued a termination notice to the Respondent. It is stated that a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, invoking arbitration was sent to the Respondent on 27.12.2025. It 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 22/07/2026 at 11:44:19 ARB.P. 428/2026 is stated that the said notice was replied to by the Respondent on 08.01.2026 denying the Purchase Order and the appointment of proposed arbitrator which actually fortifies the case of the Petitioner regarding the existence of a dispute. It is stated that on 09.01.2026, a further notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was sent to the Respondent seeking adjudication of disputes through arbitration. 3. Clause 25 of the Purchase Order dated 03.09.2025 contains an arbitration clause by which the Parties have decided to get their disputes adjudicated through arbitration. The seat of the arbitration is in Delhi and, therefore, this Court has the jurisdiction to entertain the present dispute. 4. Mr. Inderjeet Singh, learned Counsel, enters appearance on behalf of the Respondent. 5. In view of the fact that disputes have arisen between the Parties and the Purchase Order contains an arbitration clause, this Court is inclined to appoint an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties. 6. Accordingly, Ms. Sakshi Kakkar Singh, Advocate (Mob. No: 9811116227) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to 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 22/07/2026 at 11:44:19 ARB.P. 428/2026 claims/counter-claims are kept open, to be decided by the learned Arbitrator on their merits, in accordance with law. 10. 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. 11. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms, along with pending application(s), if any. SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J JULY 17, 2026 SZ 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 22/07/2026 at 11:44:19