ARB.P. 1679/2025 Page 1 of 5 $~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010776852025 + ARB.P. 1679/2025 AXIS FINANCE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Mamta Kumari and Mr. Pardeep Kumar, Advocates. versus ASHISH SURESH NIPANE .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA O R D E R % 17.09.2026 I.A. 25479/2025 (Delay) 1. This is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 filed on behalf of the petitioner, seeking condonation of 139 days delay in filing the present arbitration petition. 2. For the reasons stated therein, the application is allowed and the delay in filing the arbitration petition is condoned. 3. The application is disposed of. ARB.P. 1679/2025 4. None had appeared for the respondent on 05.08.2026. 5. However, in the interests of justice, the matter was posted for today. Even today, when the matter was called up, no one appeared for the respondent. 6. It is noted that one Mr. Arun Longani, Advocate, had appeared on 12.02.2026 and also on 23.03.2026. On 21.04.2026, one Mr. Ang Bajaj, Advocate, had represented the respondent. However, on 05.08.2026 and today, no one appeared for the respondent. It was noted in the order dated 05.08.2026 that neither the reply nor any Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent had been filed till that date and as a last and final opportunity, the matter was 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 26/09/2026 at 11:02:43 ARB.P. 1679/2025 Page 2 of 5 adjourned for today. 7. Even today, no one appears for the respondent. 8. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is constrained to proceed with the consideration of the present arbitration petition. 9. The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator. 10. It is stated that on 20.08.2021, a Loan Agreement was executed between the petitioner and the respondent for a sum of Rs.8,55,227/-. It is stated that the said amount was disbursed to the respondent in terms of the aforesaid Loan Agreement. It is stated that the respondent had since the inception of the aforesaid Loan Agreement, had been persistently, and continuously irregular in making the payment of the instalments. In that regard, the petitioner states that it had issued several reminders through its officers that the respondent was failing to adhere to the terms and conditions of the agreement dated 20.08.2021. 11. On account of the respondent continuing to default in repayment of the loan amount, the intimation notice as a Non Performing Asset was issued by the petitioner to the respondent on 07.06.2023. It is stated that despite receiving the said notice, the respondent failed to repay the outstanding amount of Rs.8,10,047/-. It is on that account that the petitioner had issued a notice invoking arbitration under Section 21 of the Act on 21.06.2024 in terms of Clause 14 of the Loan Agreement which encapsulates the Arbitration Agreement between the parties. It is further stated that despite having received the said notice, the respondent neither complied with the requirement nor agreed or consented with the appointment of an arbitrator within the statutory period of 30 days. It is in that context that the petitioner was constrained to file the present petition. 12. The arbitration agreement stated to be encapsulated in Clause 14 is 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 26/09/2026 at 11:02:43 ARB.P. 1679/2025 Page 3 of 5 reproduced hereunder: “14. All disputes, differences and/or claim or questions arising out of these presents or in any way touching or concerning the same or us to constructions, meaning or effect thereof or as to the right, obligations and liabilities of the parties hereunder shall be referred to and settled by arbitration, to be held in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or any statutory amendments thereof, of a sole arbitrator to be nominated by the Lender, and in the event of death, unwillingness, refusal, neglect, inability or incapability of a person so appointed to act as an arbitrator, the Lender may appoint u new arbitrator to be a sole arbitrator. The arbitrator shall not be required to give any reasons for the award and the award of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on all parties concerned. The arbitration proceedings shall be held Mumbai/Delhi.” 13. It is noted from the aforesaid that in the arbitration clause, the venue and seat of the arbitration was to be either Mumbai or Delhi. However, learned counsel for the petitioner states that since the loan agreement was executed within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court in Delhi, the seat of the arbitration can also be construed as Delhi. 14. The aforesaid submission is made good by drawing attention of this Court to the Annexures to the Loan Agreement which clearly contains Schedule-A regarding the place of execution and branch of the lender as at Delhi. In that context, this Court would have the requisite jurisdiction to adjudicate and entertain the present petition. 15. In the interregnum, the petitioner, before proceeding to arbitration, had also issued a Notice of intimation of a Non-Performing Asset dated 07.06.2023, to which it appears that there is no reply by the respondent. Constrained by such inaction by the respondent and lack of diligence in repaying the entire loan amount, the petitioner issued a notice under Section 21 of the Act invoking arbitration vide the notice dated 21.06.2024. The said notice is extracted hereunder: “1 That you desired of taking a Personal loan/Business Loan/Housing Loan/Mortgage Loan and therefore approached our clients for grant of Personal loan/Business Loan/Housing Loan/Mortgage Loan. Pursuant to which you and our chents entered into the loan agreement bearing 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 26/09/2026 at 11:02:43 ARB.P. 1679/2025 Page 4 of 5 No.0456PLA00017113, dated 20.08.2021 .and our clients granted/disbursed you, the addressee above, the said loan/facility. 2 That you being borrower repeatedly defaulted in payments of the above loan, thus violating the terms and conditions of the repayment schedule. Accordingly, the entire total outstanding of the above loan was called upon vide Non-Performing Assets (NPA) Intimation Notice dated 6/3/2023 to pay a total sum of Rs.810047 within 7 days of receipt of the said notice. That since, you had failed to pay the said outstanding amount, a dispute between you and our clients has arisen and as per clause 14 of the said agreement, in case any dispute or difference arises between the parties out of or in connection with the agreement or the carrying out of the works, the same shall be referred to the arbitration of a sole arbitrator. 3 That our clients, hereby proposes that Shri Narender Gill, Advocate, Chamber no.331, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi-11000 l, be nominated as sole arbitrator under the said clause. You are requested to give your consent for the appointment of Narender Gill, Advocate as sole arbitrator to determine the disputes arisen between you and my clients to the agreement dated 20.08.2021 within 30 days from receipt of this letter. 4 However, if you do not give your consent to the appointment of above mentioned gentlemen as the sole arbitrator, you are requested to suggest the name of any gentlemen, whose name you propose for appointment as a sole arbitrator for the consent of our clients, within 30 days from the receipt of this letter. 5 Please note that if you fail to give your consent for the name for the appointment of sole arbitrator or if you do not suggest the names, to whom you propose for appointment within 30 days from the receipt of this letter, our clients shall be constrained to file an application before the competent court of Law at Delhi as per clause 14 of the aforesaid agreement for the appointment of the sole arbitrator in accordance with the provisions of Arbitration Act, 1996 (as amended upto date).” 16. To the said notice too, the respondent does not appear to have responded at all. 17. In view of the above, this Court is also called upon to examine as to whether there is a valid arbitration agreement existing between the parties. 18. Having regard to the fact that nobody has appeared for the respondent to dispute or contest the averments of the documents placed on record by the petitioner, it appears that Clause 14 is a valid and subsisting arbitration agreement between the parties. 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 26/09/2026 at 11:02:43 ARB.P. 1679/2025 Page 5 of 5 19. In this context, it is beyond cavil that as per the judgement of the Supreme Court in SBI General Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Krish Spinning, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1754, this Court is required only to see as to whether there exists a valid and subsisting arbitration agreement between the parties, and not enter into the merits of the dispute, per se. 20. Having regard thereto and having been satisfied that there is an arbitration agreement encapsulated in Clause 14 of the Loan Agreement, this petition is allowed and the following directions are passed: i) Mr. Prateek Kumar, Advocate (Mob. No.9818451124) is appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. ii) The arbitration will be held under the aegis and rules of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road, New Delhi (hereinafter, referred to as the ‘DIAC’). iii) The remuneration of the learned Arbitrator shall be in terms of DIAC (Administrative Cost and Arbitrators’ Fees) Rules, 2018. iv) The learned Arbitrator is requested to furnish a declaration in terms of Section 12 of the Act prior to entering into the reference. v) It is made clear that all the rights and contentions of the parties, including as to the arbitrability of any of the claim, any other preliminary objection, as well as claims/counter-claims and merits of the dispute of either of the parties, are left open for adjudication by the learned arbitrator. vi) The petitioner shall approach the learned Arbitrator within two weeks from today. 21. The petition is disposed of. TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J SEPTEMBER 17, 2026/kct 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 26/09/2026 at 11:02:43