OCD-19 ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA COMMERCIAL DIVISION ORIGINAL SIDE AP-COM/591/2026 AVINASH PANDIT VS AMPERE BUILDING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH Date : 17th August, 2026. Appearance: Mr. Debjyoti Basu, Adv. Mr. Pujon Chatterjee, Adv. Mr. Sutosom Bhattacharyya, Adv. …for the petitioner Mr. Aasish Choudhry, Adv. Mr. Sourajit Dasgupta, Adv. Ms. Uma Bagree, Adv. …for the respondent The Court: 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 arising out of the Loan Agreement dated 21.08.2023 entered into between the parties. The petitioner and respondent no.1 had a long standing professional relationship, pursuant to which the petitioner was engaged as a consultant by respondent no.1 for a period of twelve months commencing from August, 2023. In the course of such relationship, the petitioner advanced a sum of Rs.99,00,000/- to the respondent no.1 under the aforesaid Loan Agreement dated 21.08.2023. The loan carried an interest of 10.25% per annum and 2 was repayable within two years commencing from 21st August, 2023 and expiring on 20th August, 2025. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondents paid only the first quarterly instalments of interest, calculated at the rate of 10.25% per annum from the period of January 2024 till March 2024 and thereafter committed defaults. Despite various reminders and a notice dated 20.03.2025 followed by further correspondences between the parties, the outstanding dues remained unpaid. According to the petitioner, as on 20.08.2025, a sum of Rs.1,13,09,439/- comprising the principal and accrued interest together remained outstanding and due to the petitioner. The petitioner thereafter issued a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking invocation of the arbitral proceedings vide notice dated 16.10.2025. The respondent replied to the said notice on 31.10.2025 stating, inter alia, that discussions between the parties were continuing. A further communication was issued by the respondent on 31.03.2026 raising certain allegations and seeking withdrawal of the arbitral proceedings. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that in terms of Clause 7 of the Loan Agreement, arbitration is the means of settling the disputes between the parties. The said clause does not expressly stipulate the seat of arbitration. Though the petitioner had filed a petition under Section 11 of the Act before the Mumbai Court but the same was withdrawn on 27.04.2026 for want of jurisdiction with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Court having jurisdiction. 3 Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the present application is maintainable before this Court as the Loan Agreement was executed in Kolkata, respondent no.1 has its registered office within the jurisdiction of this Court and a substantial part of the cause of action has arisen within such jurisdiction. Learned Counsel for the Respondents submits that he does not dispute the execution of the Loan Agreement, the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court to entertain the present proceedings, or the existence and applicability of the arbitration clause contained therein. The parties consent to appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. With the consent of the parties, Mr. Arnab Chakraborty, Advocate (Mob. No. 9830676096) is appointed as the learned sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The learned Sole Arbitrator shall enter upon the reference after making the disclosure in terms of 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 4 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