$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 14.08.2026 # CNR No. DLHC010148952026 + ARB.P. 643/2026 TATA CAPITAL LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Sehrawat, Adv. (through v/c) versus PUNEET GUPTA .....Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA SACHIN DATTA, J. (ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter ‘A&C Act’) seeking appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. 2. The disputes between the parties have arisen in context of a Loan Agreement dated 29.06.2025 under which the respondent borrowed a sum of Rs. 10,12,197/- from the petitioner. 3. The Arbitration Clause in the aforesaid agreement is in the following terms: Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed ARB.P. 643/2026 Page 1 of 4 By:UMANG Signing Date:24.08.2026 12:10:46 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed ARB.P. 643/2026 Page 2 of 4 By:UMANG Signing Date:24.08.2026 12:10:46 4. On 18.01.2026, consequent to the respondent’s failure to abide by the terms of the aforesaid loan agreement, the petitioner issued a Loan Recall Notice.The same was not replied to by the respondent. 5. Thereafter, on 11.02.2026, the petitioner issued a notice invoking arbitration. However, the same elicited no response. 6. None has appeared for the respondent despite due service.

7. The existence of the arbitration agreement is evident from a perusal of the aforesaid loan agreement. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said arbitration clause is to be read with serial nos. 8 and 9 of Annexure-1 appended to the loan agreement, which specify Delhi as the place of arbitration and confer jurisdiction upon the courts at Delhi. The same is as under: 9. In terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Perkins Eastman Architects DPC v. HSCC (India) Ltd, (2020) 20 SCC 760, TRF Limited v. Energo Engineering Projects Ltd, (2017) 8 SCC 377, Bharat Broadband Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed ARB.P. 643/2026 Page 3 of 4 By:UMANG Signing Date:24.08.2026 12:10:46 Network Limited v. United Telecoms Limited., 2019 SCC OnLine SC 547, SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Krish Spinning, 2024 INSC 532, and Interplay between Arbitration Agreements under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 & the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, In re,2023 SCC OnLine SC 1666, there is no impediment in constituting an arbitral tribunal to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. 10. Accordingly, Mr. Satatya Anand, Advocate (Mobile No. + 91 9454207440) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. 11. The respondent shall be at liberty to raise preliminary objections as regards arbitrability/jurisdiction, if any, which shall be decided by the Sole Arbitrator in accordance with law.

12. The learned Sole Arbitrator may proceed with the arbitration proceedings subject to furnishingto the parties requisite disclosure as required under Section 12 of the A&C Act. 13. Let arbitration take place under the aegis of and as per the Rules of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC). 14. All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the claims/counter claims are kept open, to be decided by the learned Sole Arbitrator on merits, in accordance with law. 15. Needless to say, nothing in this order shall be construed as an expression of opinion of this court on the merits of the case. 16. The present petition stands disposed of in the above terms. AUGUST 14, 2026/ss SACHIN DATTA, J Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed ARB.P. 643/2026 Page 4 of 4 By:UMANG Signing Date:24.08.2026 12:10:46

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 14.08.2026 # CNR No. DLHC010148952026 + ARB.P. 643/2026 TATA CAPITAL LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Sehrawat, Adv. (through v/c) versus PUNEET GUPTA .....Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA SACHIN DATTA, J. (ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter ‘A&C Act’) seeking appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. 2. The disputes between the parties have arisen in context of a Loan Agreement dated 29.06.2025 under which the respondent borrowed a sum of Rs. 10,12,197/- from the petitioner. 3. The Arbitration Clause in the aforesaid agreement is in the following terms: Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed ARB.P. 643/2026 Page 1 of 4 By:UMANG Signing Date:24.08.2026 12:10:46 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed ARB.P. 643/2026 Page 2 of 4 By:UMANG Signing Date:24.08.2026 12:10:46 4. On 18.01.2026, consequent to the respondent’s failure to abide by the terms of the aforesaid loan agreement, the petitioner issued a Loan Recall Notice.The same was not replied to by the respondent. 5. Thereafter, on 11.02.2026, the petitioner issued a notice invoking arbitration. However, the same elicited no response. 6. None has appeared for the respondent despite due service.

7. The existence of the arbitration agreement is evident from a perusal of the aforesaid loan agreement. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said arbitration clause is to be read with serial nos. 8 and 9 of Annexure-1 appended to the loan agreement, which specify Delhi as the place of arbitration and confer jurisdiction upon the courts at Delhi. The same is as under: 9. In terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Perkins Eastman Architects DPC v. HSCC (India) Ltd, (2020) 20 SCC 760, TRF Limited v. Energo Engineering Projects Ltd, (2017) 8 SCC 377, Bharat Broadband Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed ARB.P. 643/2026 Page 3 of 4 By:UMANG Signing Date:24.08.2026 12:10:46 Network Limited v. United Telecoms Limited., 2019 SCC OnLine SC 547, SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Krish Spinning, 2024 INSC 532, and Interplay between Arbitration Agreements under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 & the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, In re,2023 SCC OnLine SC 1666, there is no impediment in constituting an arbitral tribunal to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. 10. Accordingly, Mr. Satatya Anand, Advocate (Mobile No. + 91 9454207440) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. 11. The respondent shall be at liberty to raise preliminary objections as regards arbitrability/jurisdiction, if any, which shall be decided by the Sole Arbitrator in accordance with law.

12. The learned Sole Arbitrator may proceed with the arbitration proceedings subject to furnishingto the parties requisite disclosure as required under Section 12 of the A&C Act. 13. Let arbitration take place under the aegis of and as per the Rules of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC). 14. All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the claims/counter claims are kept open, to be decided by the learned Sole Arbitrator on merits, in accordance with law. 15. Needless to say, nothing in this order shall be construed as an expression of opinion of this court on the merits of the case. 16. The present petition stands disposed of in the above terms. AUGUST 14, 2026/ss SACHIN DATTA, J Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed ARB.P. 643/2026 Page 4 of 4 By:UMANG Signing Date:24.08.2026 12:10:46