{"id":361302,"date":"2025-09-23T13:00:05","date_gmt":"2025-09-23T07:30:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=361302"},"modified":"2025-09-25T09:45:24","modified_gmt":"2025-09-25T04:15:24","slug":"del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018No exclusivity between Dreamfolks and its clients\u2019: Delhi HC declines to pass restraining order against Encalm in airport lounge case"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> In a petition filed under Section 9<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a>, seeking grant of an interim order restraining Encalm Hospitality (‘Encalm’) and its representatives from entering a contract with Dreamfolk’s clients, the Single Judge Bench of Amit Bansal, J, held that there was no exclusivity between Dreamfolk and its clients. As such, the clients were free to enter into similar agreements with other service providers, including Encalm. Thus, the Court declined to restrain Encalm from contracting with Dreamfolk’s clients.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

The petitioner, Dreamfolks is engaged in the business of providing travel and lifestyle services including lounge access, meet and assist, airport transfers, food and beverages, spa, transit hotels\/ nap rooms, golf, and more. The respondent, Encalm is engaged in the business of acquiring licences from airport authorities for managing, operating and running the lounges.<\/p>\n

Dreamfolks entered an agreement with Encalm to provide lounge services to customers at the airport. Dreamfolks had agreements with various banks (‘clients’) that issued credit cards that could be used to access lounge services at the airport run by Encalm. For providing lounge access, Dreamfolks paid a fee to Encalm which it recovered from its clients.Enclam had sought to prematurely terminate the contract by giving a 90-day notice.<\/p>\n

Dreamfolks contended that Encalm had breached their agreement by directly contracting with its clients which resulted in significant loss of business to them. They had further argued that Encalm was bound by the terms of the agreement during the 90-day period as well and was accordingly restrained from contracting with its clients either directly or indirectly.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law and Decision<\/h3>\n

The Court noted that neither did the agreement stipulate that Dreamfolks’ clients were its exclusive clients nor was there any material put on record to suggest that the said clients had not entered into similar agreements with other service providers like Dreamfolk.<\/p>\n

Additionally, the Court noted that the clients of Dreamfolk had similar arrangements with other third parties as well where Encalm was providing services through third-party service providers. The Court opined that Dreamfolk had failed to show that there existed any exclusivity between Dreamfolk and its clients. The agreement between Dreamfolk and Encalm did not bar Encalm from entering into similar arrangements with other service providers. The Court also observed that while the terms of the contract barred ‘representatives’ of Encalm from engaging into business with Dreamfolks’ clients, the third-party service-providers could not be construed as ‘representatives’ of Encalm.<\/p>\n

Thus, the Court declined to restrain Encalm from contracting with Dreamfolks’ clients and instead reiterated the direction passed by the Court vide order dated 28-8-2025 wherein Encalm had been directed to maintain complete records of accounts in respect of all transactions entered by Encalm with the 21 clients of Dreamfolk.<\/p>\n

[Dreamfolks Services Ltd. v. Encalm Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., 2025 SCC OnLine Del 6037<\/a>, decided on 16-9-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

For the Petitioner:<\/span> Amit Sibal, Pavan Narang, Senior Advocates, Mayank Bhargava, Abhishek Batra, Vinamra Kopahira, Ankit Handa, Suditi Batra, Rajdeep Saraf, Himanshu Sethi, Advocates<\/p>\n

For the Respondent:<\/span> Rajiv Nayar, Senior Advocate, Anirudh Bakhru, N.S. Ahluwalia, Deepak Chawla, Adhish Sharma, Nitin Pandey, Advocates<\/p>\n

Buy Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996   HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"arbitration<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“Nothing has been placed on record by Dreamfolks to show that the said entities\/ banks are its exclusive clients and that they have not entered similar agreements with other service providers like Dreamfolks.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":361312,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[89667,10131,2543,89665,89670,89666,89669,70893,89668],"class_list":["post-361302","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-airport-lounge-case","tag-arbitration-and-conciliation-act","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-dreamfolk","tag-dreamfolks-lounge-dispute","tag-encalm","tag-encalm-and-dreamfolks-dispute","tag-justice-amit-bansal","tag-section-9-arbitration-act"],"yoast_head":"\nDel HC declines to pass restraining order against Encalm in DreamFolks Lounge Dispute | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court declined to restrain Encalm from contracting with Dreamfolks' clients stating that there was no exclusivity between Dreamfolks and its clients.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u2018No exclusivity between Dreamfolks and its clients\u2019: Delhi HC declines to pass restraining order against Encalm in airport lounge case\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court declined to restrain Encalm from contracting with Dreamfolks' clients stating that there was no exclusivity between Dreamfolks and its clients.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-09-23T07:30:05+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-09-25T04:15:24+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/DreamFolks-Lounge.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"800\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"533\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"\u2018No exclusivity between Dreamfolks and its clients\u2019: Delhi HC declines to pass restraining order against Encalm in airport lounge case\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/\",\"name\":\"Del HC declines to pass restraining order against Encalm in DreamFolks Lounge Dispute | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/DreamFolks-Lounge.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-09-23T07:30:05+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-09-25T04:15:24+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court declined to restrain Encalm from contracting with Dreamfolks' clients stating that there was no exclusivity between Dreamfolks and its clients.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/DreamFolks-Lounge.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/DreamFolks-Lounge.webp\",\"width\":800,\"height\":533,\"caption\":\"DreamFolks Lounge\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u2018No exclusivity between Dreamfolks and its clients\u2019: Delhi HC declines to pass restraining order against Encalm in airport lounge case\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Del HC declines to pass restraining order against Encalm in DreamFolks Lounge Dispute | SCC Times","description":"Delhi High Court declined to restrain Encalm from contracting with Dreamfolks' clients stating that there was no exclusivity between Dreamfolks and its clients.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u2018No exclusivity between Dreamfolks and its clients\u2019: Delhi HC declines to pass restraining order against Encalm in airport lounge case","og_description":"Delhi High Court declined to restrain Encalm from contracting with Dreamfolks' clients stating that there was no exclusivity between Dreamfolks and its clients.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-09-23T07:30:05+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-09-25T04:15:24+00:00","og_image":[{"width":800,"height":533,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/DreamFolks-Lounge.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"\u2018No exclusivity between Dreamfolks and its clients\u2019: Delhi HC declines to pass restraining order against Encalm in airport lounge case","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/","name":"Del HC declines to pass restraining order against Encalm in DreamFolks Lounge Dispute | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/DreamFolks-Lounge.webp","datePublished":"2025-09-23T07:30:05+00:00","dateModified":"2025-09-25T04:15:24+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Delhi High Court declined to restrain Encalm from contracting with Dreamfolks' clients stating that there was no exclusivity between Dreamfolks and its clients.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/DreamFolks-Lounge.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/DreamFolks-Lounge.webp","width":800,"height":533,"caption":"DreamFolks Lounge"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/23\/del-hc-declines-restrain-encalm-dreamfolk-airport-lounge-case\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u2018No exclusivity between Dreamfolks and its clients\u2019: Delhi HC declines to pass restraining order against Encalm in airport lounge case"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/DreamFolks-Lounge.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":361865,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/28\/high-court-cases-from-september-2025-weekly-roundup-on-karan-johars-devender-attri-judicial-in-minors-kidney-transplant\/","url_meta":{"origin":361302,"position":0},"title":"HIGH COURT SEPTEMBER 2025 WEEKLY ROUNDUP | Karan Johar’s personality rights; Minor’s Kidney Transplant Without Father’s Consent, and 3-Year Social Media Ban as Bail Condition; and more","author":"Editor","date":"September 28, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts from the fourth week of September 2025.","rel":"","context":"In "High Court Round Up"","block_context":{"text":"High Court Round Up","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/high-court-round-up\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"High Court cases from September 2025","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/round-53.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/round-53.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/round-53.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/round-53.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":372159,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/09\/india-corporate-commercial-law-developments-2025\/","url_meta":{"origin":361302,"position":1},"title":"Corporate & Commercial Law 2025: How Courts, Regulators and Lawmakers reinforced accountability and curbed abuse","author":"Soumya Yadav","date":"January 9, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"This roundup highlights key 2025 corporate and commercial law developments from Adani\u2019s HDIL resolution and Vedanta\u2019s demerger setback to SEBI\u2019s insider trading penalties, Google\u2019s CCI settlement, and the pump-and-dump ban involving actor Arshad Warsi.","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"India Corporate & Commercial Law Developments 2025","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/India-Corporate-Commercial-Law-Developments-2025.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/India-Corporate-Commercial-Law-Developments-2025.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/India-Corporate-Commercial-Law-Developments-2025.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/India-Corporate-Commercial-Law-Developments-2025.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":367145,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/","url_meta":{"origin":361302,"position":2},"title":"‘Letter consenting to unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator doesn’t constitute waiver under Sec. 12 (5) of Arbitration Act’: Delhi HC","author":"Editor","date":"November 19, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cAt best, the letter consenting to appointment of sole arbitrator, was a conditional acceptance of the appointment of a sole arbitrator. The condition being that the sole arbitrator would adjudicate the disputes between the petitioner and both the respondents.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":250101,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/21\/appointment-of-arbitrator\/","url_meta":{"origin":361302,"position":3},"title":"Del HC | Can sole arbitrator’s appointment be disputed if he was consultant\/advisor to one of the parties to dispute? Court examines","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 21, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: J.R. Midha, J., in view of serious doubts on the independence of sole arbitrator as named in the arbitration agreement, appointed another independent arbitrator. Petitioner sought appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Parties had agreed for reference of disputes to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Alternate Dispute Resolution"","block_context":{"text":"Alternate Dispute Resolution","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/alternate_dispute_resolution\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":256923,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/11\/10\/law-on-arbitration-what-is-the-remedy-against-an-order-allowing-application-under-s-8-of-arbitration-act-where-existence-of-arbitration-clause-is-not-disputed\/","url_meta":{"origin":361302,"position":4},"title":"Law on Arbitration | What is the remedy against an order allowing application under S. 8 of Arbitration Act, where existence of arbitration clause is not disputed? Del HC discusses","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 10, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Amit Bansal, J., dismissed a petition challenging the order passed by the lower court whereby respondent's application under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was admitted. Instant petition was filed impugning the decision of the lower court whereby the application filed on behalf of the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":328404,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/09\/delhi-hc-appoints-arbitrator-resolve-dispute-between-yuvraj-singh-and-real-estate-developer\/","url_meta":{"origin":361302,"position":5},"title":"\u2018Necessary ingredients of Sec. 11(6) clearly exist\u2019; Delhi HC appoints Arbitrator to resolve dispute between Yuvraj Singh and real estate developer for claim of Rs. 1.38 Crores","author":"Editor","date":"August 9, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cDeletion of party is an issue to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal, it cannot be looked into by the Court under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/361302","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=361302"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/361302\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/361312"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=361302"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=361302"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=361302"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}