OCD-24 ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA COMMERCIAL DIVISION ORIGINAL SIDE AP-COM/721/2026 TATA CAPITAL LIMITED VS SHREE SIDDHI VINAYAK TRADERS BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH Date : 23rd September, 2026. Appearance:- Mr. Avishek Guha, Adv. Mr. Ankush Majumdar, Adv. …for petitioner. The Court: - Affidavit of service is taken on record. Despite service, none appears for the respondent. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes and differences arising out of Loan cum Guarantee Agreement for Channel Finance-MSME dated 28th November, 2024 read with the Registered Master Terms and Conditions for Channel Finance dated 17th November, 2023. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner agreed to grant a loan facility to the respondent in the nature of Channel Finance (Facility) to the tune of Rs.25,00,000/-. Thereafter, a Sanction Letter dated 28th November, 2024 was issued by the petitioner and which was countersigned by the Respondent, which culminated into the Agreement for Channel Finance- MSME dated 28th November, 2024 read with the Registered Master Terms and Conditions for Channel Finance dated 17th November, 2023 between the parties. 2 It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent committed defaults in repayment of the facilities. Consequently, the petitioner issued a notice dated 17th March, 2026, recalling the facilities and demanding repayment of the outstanding dues. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as on 17th March, 2026, a sum of Rs.23,58,688/- was claimed to be due and payable. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide notice dated 7th July, 2026 issued under Section 21 of the said Act, the respondents were called upon to participate in the arbitral proceedings. The said notice was duly served upon the respondents. The respondents, however, neither responded to the said notice nor took any steps in terms of the agreement for constitution of the arbitral tribunal. Clause 13 of the Loan cum Guarantee Agreement for Channel Finance- MSME dated 28th November, 2024 read with the Registered Master Terms and Conditions for Channel Finance dated 17th November, 2023 contains an arbitration clause providing for resolution of disputes between the parties through arbitration. Clause 14 further provides that Kolkata shall have exclusive jurisdiction in respect of the disputes between the parties. It is noted that the arbitration agreement was duly executed. The execution of the agreement and the existence of the arbitration clause are prima facie noted by this Court. The statutory notice under Section 21 of the said Act, has been duly issued and served upon the respondents who have failed to act upon the same. It is now well settled principle of law that the jurisdiction of the court under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is confined to 3 a prima facie examination of the existence and validity of the arbitration agreement. As per 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, at the stage of exercising jurisdiction under Section 11 of this Act, this Court is only required to examine the existence of a valid arbitration agreement containing an arbitration clause. 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. In view of the aforesaid, this Court exercises its jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and hereby appoints Ms. Shruti Swaika, Advocate (9874599420) as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The learned Sole Arbitrator shall enter upon the reference 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 fix his remuneration in terms of the Fourth Schedule of the Act or as may be agreed between the parties. A copy of this order shall be communicated to the learned Sole Arbitrator to take necessary steps. 4 It is clarified that all questions relating to the arbitrability of the disputes, maintainability, 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. D. Barua