$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 39/2026 OYO HOTELS AND HOMES PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Paromita Majumdar, Ms. Meenakshi Vimal, Mr. Akash Bhatt and Ms. Riya Sagar, Advocates. versus M/S KARTHIK BHAVAN & ORS. .....Respondents Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR O R D E R % 02.02.2026 1. The present Petition, under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeks the following reliefs: “a) Grant a direction to maintain the status quo with respect to secure and unhindered management and operational control of the subject property situated at W-No. 21, Park Badavne, Shivamogga, Karnataka-577201, India, operating under the brand name “Karthik Bhavan”, in accordance with the MSA dated 05.03.2025; b) Pass a direction restraining the Respondent, its agents, servants, or any other persons claiming through or under it, from in any manner interfering with, obstructing, or creating day-to-day hurdles in the Petitioner‟s contractual rights to manage, operate, and control the Subject Property, including but not limited to: (i) disrupting or restricting access of the Petitioner‟s staff, Operator, guests, vendors, or service providers; (ii) interfering with reception, booking, check-in/check-out, housekeeping, kitchen, restaurant, or other hotel operations; 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 06/02/2026 at 12:58:38 (iii) obstructing the use of utilities, amenities, infrastructure, or common areas necessary for smooth functioning of the hotel; (iv) issuing threats, demands, or instructions to employees or guests contrary to the Petitioner‟s management rights; and (v) undertaking any act which hampers the uninterrupted day- to-day running and commercial operations of the Subject Property. (vi) Direct the respondent to refrain from terminating or threatening to terminate the agreement within the Lock-in Period. c) Pass a direction restraining the Respondent, its agents, servants, or any other persons claiming through or under it, from creating any third-party rights or effecting any change in the nature, character, or possession of the property. d) Pass any such other order/direction as this Hon‟ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, on instructions, seeks to withdraw the present Petition with liberty to take appropriate steps as may be permissible in accordance with law. 3. Liberty, as sought for, is granted. 4. Accordingly, the present Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. FEBRUARY 02, 2026/nd/va/sg 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 06/02/2026 at 12:58:38