$~55 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 1173/2026 BIMAL BHARATBHAI BALAR .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Shalaka Garg, Advocate versus APPBRODA TECH FZCO .....Respondent Through: Ms. Amiti Gupta, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD O R D E R % 20.07.2026 I.A. 18608/2026 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. ARB.P. 1173/2026 1. The present Petition has been filed under Section 11(5) & 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties. 2. The facts of the case reveal that the Petitioner entered into a Technical Agreement dated 01.12.2021 with the Respondent for monetization of all websites and mobile applications. 3. It is the case of the Petitioner that disputes arose between the parties after the Respondent started raising issues with the Petitioner’s app and terminated the Petitioner’s account unilaterally. It is stated that a draft settlement agreement was shared by the Respondent with the Petitioner and the Petitioner raised concerns regarding the said draft settlement agreement, 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 30/07/2026 at 14:18:34 the Respondent issued a legal notice dated 03.11.2025, which was replied to by the Petitioner on 04.11.2025. 4. Clause 8 of the Technical Agreement contains an arbitration clause, by which the parties have agreed to get their disputes adjudicated through arbitration. The said clause specifically indicates that the venue of the arbitration shall be at Delhi. 5. A notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration Act invoking arbitration was issued to the by the Petitioner on 30.04.2026 which according to the Petitioner has been vaguely replied to by the Respondent, and therefore, the Petitioner has approached this Court for appointment of an Arbitrator. 6. Issue notice. 7. Learned Counsel for the Respondent accepts notice. 8. Learned Counsel for the Respondent states that the Respondent has objections regarding the arbitrability of the disputes. 9. Applying the dictum of the Apex Court in Project Director NHAI v. M. Hakeem, (2021) 9 SCC 1 and SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Krish Spinning, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1754, it is for the arbitrator to take a decision on these issues in an appropriate application filed before him. 10. Accordingly, Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Advocate, (Mob No: 9811080285) 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 Schedule of Fees maintained by the DIAC. 12. The learned Arbitrator is also requested to file the requisite disclosure 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 30/07/2026 at 14:18:34 under Section 12(2) of the Arbitration Act within three weeks of entering reference. 13. All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the claims/counter-claims are kept open including the aspect of limitation, 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 20, 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 30/07/2026 at 14:18:34