M/S UNITED SPIRITS LTD. REPRESENTED THRO ITS DULY AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY HIMANSHU SINGH CHANDEL v. JHARKHAND STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAING DIRECTOR
A.APPL/22/2026 · 2026-06-19
Transfer Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 17177 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 17177 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:JHHC:17934
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Arbitration Application No. 22 of 2026 M/s United Spirits Limited having its registered office at 'UB Tower' # 24, Vittal Mallya Road, P.O. & P.S. Cubbon Park, Shanthala Nagar, Ashok Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka, India, 560001 represented through its duly authorized signatory Himanshu Singh Chandel, S/o Hemant Singh Chandel, aged about 47 years, working as "Senior Manager-Sales" having its Branch office at 4th Floor, No. 411, Eastern Mall, Circular Road, Near Dangratoli Chowk, P.O. & P.S. Lalpur, District-Ranchi
… … … Petitioner
Versus Jharkhand State Beverages Corporation Limited through its Managing Director having its office at Utpad Bhawan, Ground Floor Near Naveen Police Kendra, Kanke Road, P.O. & P.S. Kanke, District- Ranchi … … … Respondent
---------
CORAM:
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
--------- For the Petitioner: Mr. Mayank Mohit Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. Raunak Sahay, Advocate --------- 03 /Dated: 19.06.2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Mr Raunak Sahay, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that he has not received instructions for filing of reply. However, he agrees to proceed based on the averments in the application for appointment of Arbitrator, on a demurer. 3. This is an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the said Act) for appointment of an Arbitrator. 4. Disputes have arisen between the parties in relation to agreement dated 1st April, 2017 which is annexed to this application as Annexure-2. Clause 10 of the agreement dated 01.04.2017 reads as follows: -
“10. ARBITRATION Any dispute, which may arise between the Parties herein, shall be submitted to arbitration. The arbitral award shall be conclusive, final and binding on both the Parties herein. The distributor/manufacturer has agreed with the Corporation to
2026:JHHC:17934
-2-
provide for the nomination of a sole arbitrator by the Corporation only from amongst the following:- (a) Managing Director, J.S.B.C.L or his assignees.”
5. From the aforesaid, it is evident that the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement between the parties cannot be disputed. Very fairly, such existence has not even been disputed. However, without prejudice Mr Sahay submitted that the cause of action, if any, to sue arose in 2019. He submitted that the claims raised by the applicant, apart from being frivolous, were denied sometime in August, 2022. He pointed out that this application has been filed only on 01.04.2026. 6. Accordingly, Mr Sahay submitted that the invocation of the arbitration clause and the attempt to seek adjudication of stale, belated and time- barred disputes cannot be permitted at this stage. He submitted that this is a good ground for the dismissal of this application. 7. Mr Mayank Mohit Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant, strongly disputed the contentions of Mr Sahay and submitted that the applicant’s claim is not belated but well within the prescribed period of limitation. He submitted that, in any event, this is not a matter which should be investigated at the stage of considering an application for the appointment of an arbitrator. Issues of limitation, etc., could be left open for determination by the Arbitral Tribunal once constituted. 8.
The scope of consideration of an application under Section 11(6) of the said Act is extremely limited. It is limited to examining the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and does not extend to determining issues of limitation, etc., which are now sought to be raised on behalf of the respondent. 9. In the case of Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Stamp Act, 1899, in
2026:JHHC:17934
-3-
RE, (2024) 6 SCC 1 and SBI General Insurance Company Limited Vs Krish Spinning, (2024) 12 SCC 1, the aforesaid proposition has been laid down and reiterated. 10. Accordingly, by leaving open the contention of limitation or belated claims now raised by Mr Sahay on behalf of the respondent, a case is made out for the appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate on the disputes that have undoubtedly arisen between the parties in the context of the agreement dated 01.04.2017, which contains the arbitration clause. 11.
Learned counsel for the parties agree without prejudice to their respective contentions that Hon’ble Mr Justice Tapen Sen, a Former Judge of this High Court, could be appointed as an Arbitrator in this matter.
12. Accordingly, Hon’ble Mr Justice Tapen Sen, Former Judge of this High Court, residing at Flat No. 3903, Sri Ram Garden (C-Block), 9th Floor, opposite Reliance Smart, Kanke Road, Ranchi 834008, is hereby appointed as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties arising out of and in connection with the agreement referred to above;
13. The learned sole Arbitrator is requested to forward the statutory statement of disclosure under Section 11(8), read with Section 12(1) of the said Act, to the parties within a period of two weeks from the receipt of a copy of this order.
14. All contentions of all parties and objections on behalf of the respondent, including the contentions now raised in opposition to this application, are left open for decision by the sole Arbitrator so constituted.
15. The Arbitrator’s fees shall be in terms of the 4th Schedule of the said Act. All arbitral costs and fees of the Arbitral Tribunal shall be borne by the parties equally in the first instance and shall be subject to any final Award that may be passed by the Tribunal in relation to the costs.
2026:JHHC:17934
-4-
16. This application is disposed of. Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, do not survive and are disposed of.
17. The Registry is directed to intimate the learned Arbitrator so appointed to take up the arbitration proceedings and shall also provide photocopies of the entire pleadings, along with copies of the entire order- sheets, to the learned Arbitrator.
18. All concerned must act on an authenticated copy of this order
(M.S. Sonak, C.J.)
June 19, 2026
N.A.F.R. APK/VK
Uploaded on 20.06.2026