OCD-22 ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA COMMERCIAL DIVISION ORIGINAL SIDE AP-COM/536/2026 TATA CAPITAL LIMITED VS NANDAN SAHA STEEL PVT. LTD. AND ORS. BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH Date : 29th July, 2026. Appearance: Mr. Avishek Guha, Adv. Ms. Arunika Dutta, Adv. Mr. Ankush Majumdar, Adv. …for the petitioner The Court: Affidavit of service is taken on record. Despite service, none appears on behalf of the respondents. Notice of motion is also taken on record. The petitioner has preferred the present petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of a learned sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes and differences which have arisen between the parties in connection with an agreement for Term Loan dated 27.10.2023 read with Registered Master Terms and Conditions for Term Loan dated 31.12.2018. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had advanced a term loan to the respondent no.1 for its working capital requirements. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner sanctioned the said credit 2 facility of Rs.1,20,00,000/- and the parties executed an Agreement for Term Loan dated 27.10.2023 read with the registered Master Terms and Conditions for Term Loan dated 31.12.2018. The respondent nos. 2 and 3 executed personal guarantees securing due repayment of the loan and undertook liability co-extensive with that of respondent no.1. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the said loan was duly disbursed which was received by the respondent no.1. However, after making certain repayments, the respondent no.1 persisted in defaulting in servicing the loan account. Despite repeated requests and reminders, the outstanding dues were not regularised. Consequently, the loan account was classified as a Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 11.10.2025. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner recalled the entire facility vide Notice for Recall of Loan and Invocation of Arbitration dated 17.03.2026 and further the petitioner had issued a notice dated 06.04.2026 under Section 21 of the Act invoking the arbitration clause being Clause No.13 of the said agreement, read with Clause 24 of the Registered Master Terms and Conditions for Term Loan dated 31.12.2018. Despite service of the notice, none of the respondents took any steps for constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the arbitration clause provides that this Court has jurisdiction and that the seat and venue of the arbitration is within the jurisdiction of this Court. This Court has considered the materials placed on record and the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner. 3 The existence of a valid arbitration agreement between the parties is evident from the Agreement for Term Loan read with Registered Master Terms and Conditions for Term Loan. The disputes raised by the petitioner arose directly out of the said loan transaction and are covered by the arbitration agreement. The petitioner has duly invoked the arbitration clause by issuing a notice under Section 21 of the Act. However, the respondents have failed to act in accordance with the agreed procedure for appointment of an Arbitrator. In view of section 11(6A) of the Act: “ the Supreme Court or as the case may be, the High Court, while considering any application under sub-section (4) or sub-section (5) or sub-section (6), shall notwithstanding any judgment decree or order of any court, confine to the examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement.” Accordingly, the scope of examination under Section 11 of the Act is confined to the existence of a valid agreement containing a valid arbitration clause. Upon consideration of the materials placed on record, this Court is satisfied that the valid arbitration agreement exists between the parties and that live disputes have arisen thereunder requiring adjudication through arbitration. In view of the same, this Court is, therefore, satisfied that the requirements under Section 11(6) of the Act stand fulfilled and that the disputes between the parties are fit to be referred to arbitration. Accordingly, this Court appoints Ms. Shruti Swaika, Advocate (Mobile No. 9874599420) as the learned sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. 4 The learned Sole Arbitrator shall enter upon the reference making the disclosure with Section 12(1) of the Act and subject to the provisions of Section 12(5) thereof. The learned sole Arbitrator shall be entitled to fix the remuneration in accordance with the Fourth Schedule of the Act or as may be mutually agreed between the parties. A copy of this order shall be communicated by the petitioner to the learned sole Arbitrator for necessary action. It is clarified that all questions relating to the arbitrability of the disputes, the admissibility of the claims, limitation, jurisdiction, and all other issues are left open to be urged before the learned Sole Arbitrator, who shall decide the same in accordance with law. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition stands disposed of. (GAURANG KANTH, J.) R.Bhar