M/S. JANKI MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. vs M/S. SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 10th February 2025 + CM(M) 258/2025 M/S. JANKI MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Aakarsh Mishra & Mr. Arkaj Kumar, Advs. versus M/S. SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Deepak Sabharwal, Mr. Anurya Sabharwal, Ms. Isha Dabas & Mr. Krish Bhatia, Advs CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA J U D G M E N T ( ORAL) RAVINDER DUDEJA, J. 1. The petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeks to set aside the order dated 17.12.2024, passed by the Arbitral Tribunal, whereby, the right of the petitioner to file the Statement of Defence has been closed. 2. Factual background of the case is that petitioner and respondent entered into two overlapping agreements on 16.08.2017. 3. Respondent issued two termination letters dated 27.11.2018, in terms of clauses of the agreements. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 258/2025 Page 1 of 6 By:SUNITA KUMARI Signing Date:12.02.2025 17:19:58 3. Later on, on 18.03.2021, respondent issued notice invoking arbitration clause under the Authorized Service Centre Agreement dated 16.08.2017, claiming Rs. 12,16,769/- as outstanding. 4. On 04.11.2022, respondent filed Section 11 petition before this Court, seeking appointment of Arbitrator and for referring the disputes to Arbitral Tribunal. This Court vide order dated 24.03.2023, directed the parties to approach Delhi High Court Mediation Centre for amicable settlement, if possible, and in case of failure of mediation, the parties were at liberty to proceed before the Delhi International Arbitration Centre [“DIAC”] for conducting arbitration proceedings. 5. The mediation failed on 29.03.2023. Respondent approached DIAC in terms of High Court directions. 6.