INDU DAWAR vs PRAVEEN KUMAR AND ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 04.02.2026 + O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 228/2025 INDU DAWAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mayank Arora, Ms. Vedika Gupta and Mr. Pulkit Dahiya, Advocates. versus PRAVEEN KUMAR AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjiv Sharma, Mr. Mohd. Khalid and Ms. Mansi Bhardwaj Advocates for R-1. Mr. Shantwanu Singh, Advocates for R-2 & R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR % JUDGEMENT (ORAL) 1. The present petition filed under Section 9(1)(ii)(d) and 9(1)(ii)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, [“the Act”], inter alia, seeks interim injunctions and appointment of a receiver. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the parties on instructions jointly submit that instead of adjudication of this petition on merit by this Court, the present lis be referred to arbitration under the aegis of DIAC, and till the time the learned Arbitrator enters into reference, status quo as of today may be maintained. 3. This Court finds the suggestion put forth jointly by the parties to be reasonable, fair and appropriate in the facts and circumstances of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARVINDER KAUR O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 228/2025 Page 1 of 4 BHATIA Signing Date:07.02.2026 15:23:10 the case. 4. It is noted that learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the disputes between them are governed by the arbitration clause contained in Clause 15 of the New Partnership Deed executed in November 2022, which was entered into in continuation of the earlier Partnership Deed dated 24.11.2021. The parties are also in consensus for the appointment of an arbitrator. For the sake of convenience, the Arbitration clause, being Clause 15 of the New Partnership Deed, is reproduced hereunder: “15) Any disputes or difference