Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

M/S Morani Motocorp Private Limited vs M/S Volvo Auto India Private Limited on 15 October, 2025

Author: Jyoti Singh

Bench: Jyoti Singh

                          $~4
                          *         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +         ARB.P. 309/2025 & I.A. 3904/2025
                                    M/S MORANI MOTOCORP PRIVATE
                                    LIMITED                          .....Petitioner
                                                 Through: Mr. Abdullah Tanveer, Advocate.

                                                                  versus

                                    M/S VOLVO AUTO INDIA PRIVATE
                                    LIMITED                              .....Respondent
                                                  Through: Ms. Aastha Trivedi, Mr. Anand Amit
                                                  and Mr. Ashish Mukhi, Advocates.
                                    CORAM:
                                    HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH
                                                                  ORDER

% 15.10.2025

1. This petition is filed on behalf of the Petitioner under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('1996 Act') for appointment of a Sole Arbitrator in respect of disputes arising from Dealer Agreement dated 20.10.2016 for setting up Retail Outlet in Jaipur and an Authorized Service Centre of Volvo vehicles as also second Dealer Agreement dated 01.08.2018, renewing the first one. Petitioner issued a dispute notice dated 18.11.2021 in terms of Article 33(2) of the second Dealer Agreement, seeking amicable settlement, but Respondent failed to address the concerns raised and thus Petitioner sent notice invoking arbitration dated 31.01.2022 to the Respondent in accordance with Arbitration Clause Articles 33(2) and (3) of the Agreements, however, Respondent did not agree to the proposed names and suggested three different names, which were not acceptable to the Petitioner and hence this petition was filed.

ARB.P. 309/2025 Page 1 of 2

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 31/10/2025 at 22:10:44

2. Learned counsel for the Respondent, on instructions, does not dispute the existence of Arbitration Agreement albeit claims of the Petitioner are disputed on merits and in light of this, Court finds no impediment in appointing the Arbitrator.

3. Accordingly, with the consent of the parties, Mr. Justice J.R. Midha, Former Judge of this Court (Mobile No. 9717495003) is appointed as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. Fee of the Arbitrator shall be fixed as per Fourth Schedule of 1996 Act, as agreed between the parties.

4. Learned Arbitrator shall give disclosure under Section 12 of the 1996 Act before entering upon reference.

5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and all rights and contentions of the respective parties are left open.

6. Petition along with pending application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

JYOTI SINGH, J OCTOBER 15, 2025 Ch ARB.P. 309/2025 Page 2 of 2 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 31/10/2025 at 22:10:44