ARB.P. 1135/2026 $~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010301132026 + ARB.P. 1135/2026 M/S BRANDAVAN FOOD PRODUCTS .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Jasmeet Singh, Mr. Vijay Sharma, Mr. Saif Ali, Mr. Akhilesh Dubey and Ms. Tanpreet Singh, Advocates. versus INDIAN RAILWAY CATERING AND TOURISM CORPORATION LIMITED (IRCTC) & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ashim Shridhar, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH O R D E R % 30.09.2026 I.A. 18076/2026 (Exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. Application stands disposed of. I.A. 18077/2026 3. This petition is filed on behalf of the Petitioner seeking permission for filing length synopsis and list of dates. 4. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. Synopsis and list of dates are taken on record. 5. Application stands disposed of. ARB.P. 1135/2026 6. This petition is filed on behalf of the Petitioner under Section 11(6) 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 09/10/2026 at 11:17:47 ARB.P. 1135/2026 the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘1996 Act’) for appointment of an Arbitrator. 7. As pleaded in the petition, Petitioner was awarded the contract for operation and management of catering services on Train No. 12001/12002, New Delhi-Bhopal Shatabdi Express. Initially, a Master License Agreement (‘MLA’) was executed between the Petitioner and Northern Railway, however, pursuant to Catering Policy, 2017, Tripartite Agreement (TPA) dated 27.07.2017 was executed between the Petitioner, Northern Railway and IRCTC and IRCTC assumed the rights and obligations of the Licensor. Disputes arose between the parties after IRCTC implemented revised catering menus pursuant to Commercial Circular No. 25/2022 dated 15.11.2022, without making corresponding revisions to the applicable tariff and Petitioner invoked Arbitration Clause 8.9 of TPA read with Clause 20.2 of MLA on 05.06.2024. However, there was no response and another notice was sent on 20.05.2026. But again, there was no response and this petition was filed. 8. Learned counsel appearing for IRCTC, the contesting Respondent, on instructions, does not dispute the existence of Arbitration Clause and hence, has no objection to the Arbitrator being appointed in terms of the Arbitration Clauses referred above. 9. Accordingly, with the consent of the parties Ms. Iram Majid, Advocate (Mobile No. 9873811531) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. Fee of the Arbitrator shall be fixed as per Fourth Schedule of 1996 Act, as agreed. 10. Learned Arbitrator shall give disclosure under Section 12 of 1996 Act before entering upon reference. 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 09/10/2026 at 11:17:47 ARB.P. 1135/2026 11. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and all rights and contentions of the respective parties are left open. 12. Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. JYOTI SINGH, J SEPTEMBER 30, 2026/HS 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 09/10/2026 at 11:17:47