$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010192572025 + ARB.P. 607/2025 CLIX CAPITAL SERVICES PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr.Ravi Shankar Garg, Mr. Puneet Raj, Mr. pankaj Shukla, Ms. Riya Khandelwal and Ms. Kaavyanjali Sahu, Advocates. versus M/S JANKI CT SCAN AND RADIOLOGY CENTRE PVT LTD & ORS. .....Respondents Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD O R D E R % 16.09.2026 1. The instant petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by the Petitioner for appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes which have arisen between the parties under the Loan Agreement dated 04.10.2023. 2. It is stated that the Respondents approached the Petitioner for providing financial assistance for purchase of machines/medical equipment. It is stated that an amount of Rs.1,01,33,126/- was sanctioned by the Petitioner and was disbursed for purchase of medical equipment which was to be repaid in 62 monthly installments of Rs. 2,36,043/-. 3. It is the case of the Petitioner that since the Respondent did not adhere 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 24/09/2026 at 10:43:34 to the terms of the Loan Agreement, the Petitioner terminated the loan facility vide notice dated 28.12.2024 and according to the Petitioner on that date Rs. 1,05,49,798.10/- was due and payable. 4. It is stated that neither the outstanding amount was paid nor the said termination notice was not replied by the Respondent, and therefore, the Petitioner filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act before the court of competent jurisdiction. A Receiver was appointed by the court of competent jurisdiction, i.e., D. J. (Commercial)-02, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi and two out of three equipment have been re- possessed. 5. Clause 10 of the loan agreement contains an arbitration clause which provides that the parties shall get their disputes adjudicated through arbitration and the seat of arbitration shall be Delhi. The said Clause also indicates that any dispute between the parties will be subject to the jurisdiction of courts at Delhi. 6. It is stated by learned Counsel for the Petitioner that notice dated 21.02.2025 under Section 21 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act has been issued to the Respondents, which according to the Petitioner has been duly served on the Respondents. However, there is no response on behalf of the Respondents, and therefore, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present petition. 7. Notice was issued in the present petition on 08.04.2025. The order sheets indicate that on 24.04.2025, learned Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the Respondents and the parties were sent to mediation, however, nothing has come out of mediation. The office report also indicates that the Respondents have been served. 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 24/09/2026 at 10:43:34 8. In view of the fact that the Respondents have been served and they have appeared in Court and the matter was referred to mediation, this Court is not inclined to serve fresh notice on the Respondents. 9. Accordingly, Ms. Manisha Aggarwal, Advocate (Mob No: 9818427971) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. 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. 14. The present Petition stands disposed of in the above terms along with pending application(s), if any. SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J SEPTEMBER 16, 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 24/09/2026 at 10:43:34