Delhi High Court - Orders
Ministry Of Road Transport Highways ... vs Sibmost Tata Projects Jv & Anr on 13 November, 2025
$~50
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CM(M) 2168/2025
MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT HIGHWAYS THROUGH
ITS PROJECT DIRECTOR .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Gunjan Sinha Jain, Advocate.
versus
SIBMOST TATA PROJECTS JV & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Naveen Chawla, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
ORDER
% 13.11.2025 CM APPL. 70812/2025 (exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
CM(M) 2168/2025
2. Petitioner has assailed orders dated 14.11.2024 and 08.03.2025 of the learned Arbitral Tribunal, whereby the issue of fees of the Arbitral Tribunal was decided. It appears that in the first procedural order dated 29.10.2023, the learned Tribunal recorded that the fees of the Tribunal shall be as per 4 th Schedule to the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, but subsequently, by way of the impugned order dated 14.11.2024, the Tribunal decided that in view of Clause 26.3 of the contract, the fees has to be in accordance with the Rules of Arbitration of the International Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ICADR), whose assets were taken over by India International Arbitration Centre, and Rules of IIAC prescribed a different fee structure. Paragraphs 9 and 10 of the impugned order dated 14.11.2024 would be relevant for the present issue.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for petitioner was requested to address 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 13/11/2025 at 22:11:22 on the scope of Article 227 of the Constitution of India in order to entertain such a dispute through the present petition. Learned counsel for petitioner placed reliance on a judgment of a coordinate bench of this Court in the case of IDFC First Bank Limited vs. Hitachi MGRM Net Limited, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 4052. It is contended that the present petition would be sustainable because it raises exceptional circumstances, in the sense that if the fee as per the impugned order is not paid, counterclaim would be rejected. Prima facie, accepting such an argument would render every order of the Arbitral Tribunal open to judicial interference, which in turn would frustrate the very object behind enactment of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act.
4. Further, learned counsel for respondents appearing on advance intimation refers to certain documents in support of his claim that it is the present petitioner only, who had proposed the fee structure in accordance with IIAC regulations, so now petitioner cannot retract. Those documents do not form a part of the present petition. It is made clear by learned counsel for petitioner that those documents pertained to some other arbitration proceedings.
5. Even going by this submission, prima facie, I am not satisfied about the sustainability of this petition as raising any exceptional circumstance.
6. As requested, learned counsel for respondents may file a short written submission along with necessary documents within two weeks.
7. Relist on 10.12.2025 in Advance List.
GIRISH KATHPALIA, J NOVEMBER 13, 2025/dr 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 13/11/2025 at 22:11:22