Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Delhi · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17148 (DEL)

PRIYANK HUDA v. BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED

ARB.P./868/2026 · 2026-09-02

Avneesh Jhingan

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010212122026 + ARB.P. 868/2026, I.A. 13341/2026 & I.A. 13342/2026 PRIYANK HUDA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Yogesh Kumar, Adv. versus BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr. K.G. Gopalakrishnan, Mr. Girish Haul and Ms. Alivia Dutta, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN O R D E R % 02.09.2026 1. This petition is filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act’) for appointment of an arbitrator. 2. The brief facts are that the petitioner is the owner of property bearing No. A-24, Khasra No. 1379/89, Madhu Vihar, Village Mandawali Fazalpur, Shahdara, Delhi (for short ‘the premises’). The respondent, engaged in providing mobile network services took the premises on rent for installation and operation of its telecommunication equipment. A lease deed dated 13.05.2013 (for short ‘lease deed’) was executed between the parties for a period of three years having a clause for annual increase of 15% in the monthly rent. Clause 12 of the lease deed provided for resolution of disputes through arbitration. 2.1 Dispute arose between the parties, inter alia regarding payment of 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 05/09/2026 at 09:44:00 dues and vacating the premises. The petitioner filed a suit for recovery of rent before the District Court, New Delhi. The respondent moved an application under Section 8 of the Act which was allowed vide order dated 04.03.2025 directing the parties to refer their disputes to arbitration in terms of the lease deed. The petitioner issued a notice dated 12.03.2025 invoking arbitration under Section 21 of the Act. Hence, the present petition. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent on instructions has no serious objection for referring the matter to arbitration. 4. Accordingly, the petition is allowed by appointing Ms. Iram Majid, Advocate (Mobile No. 9873811531) as the sole arbitrator for adjudication of the disputes which have arisen between the parties. 5. Arbitral proceedings will be held under the aegis of Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC). Fee of the Arbitrator shall be fixed as per fee schedule. 6. Before entering upon reference, the learned Arbitrator will comply with Section 12 of the Act. 7. It is made clear that since this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the rival claims of the parties and it will be open for the parties to file their respective claims/counter claims before the learned Arbitrator which will be considered in accordance with law. 8. A copy of this order be forwarded to the learned Arbitrator for information. AVNEESH JHINGAN, J SEPTEMBER 2, 2026/Pa 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 05/09/2026 at 09:44:00