LOGIX TECHNOPARK PVT LTD v. ATS HEIGHTS PVT LTD & ANR.

ARB.P. 747/2026 and other conn. Page 1 of 3

$~4 & 5

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010175812026 + ARB.P. 747/2026 LOGIX TECHNOPARK PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay K. Shandilya, Mr.

Abhishek Kumar Singh, Mr.

Adit Srivastava, Advs.

versus

ATS HEIGHTS PVT LTD & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Kartik Nayar, Mr. Krish Kalra, Mr. Divyansh Rai, Mr.

Anupam Verma, and Mr.

Shashank Shekhar, Advs.

5.

# CNR No. DLHC010405132026

+ O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 96/2026

ATS HEIGHTS P LTD .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Kartik Nayar, Mr. Krish

Kalra, Mr. Divyansh Rai, Mr.

Anupam Verma, and Mr.

Shashank Shekhar, Advs.

versus

LOGIX TECHNO PARK PVT. LTD. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay K. Shandilya, Mr.

Abhishek Kumar Singh, Mr.

Adit Srivastava, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA

JUDGMENT(ORAL)

% 12.10.2026

1. The present petition has been filed under Sections 14 and 15 read with Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 1 seeking appointment of a learned S ubstitute Sole Arbitrator, consequent to the withdrawal of previously appointed learned Sole

1 “Act” hereinafter

ARB.P. 747/2026 and other conn. Page 2 of 3

Arbitrator, Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.R. Shriram (Retd.), former Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court.

2. This Court had appointed the former Sole Arbitrator vide order dated 26.05.2026 to adjudicate the disputes arisen between the parties.

Pursuant thereto, the former Sole Arbitrator fixed a preliminary hearing on 27.08.2026.

3. During the said hearing, the former Sole Arbitrator proposed fees of Rs.2,50,000/ - per session, to be borne equally by the parties.

On the other hand, the Petitioner proposed fee to be determined in accordance with the applicable DIAC Rules.

4. Since no consensus could be arrived between the parties regarding the fees, the former Sole Arbitrator expressed his inability to proceed with the reference and directed closure of the arbitral proceedings.

5. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that, in view of the aforesaid withdrawal, the mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator stands terminated a nd a substitute Arbitrator is required to be appointed.

6. Learned Counsel for the Respondent has no objection to the termination of the mandate and appointment of a substitute Arbitrator.

7. In view of the withdrawal of the former learned Sole Arbitrator from the reference and his expressed inability to proceed with the arbitral proceedings, the mandate of Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.R. Shriram

ARB.P. 747/2026 and other conn. Page 3 of 3

former Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court, stands terminated in terms of Section 14(1) of the Act.

8. In view of the a bove, a substitute Arbitrator is required to be appointed in terms of Section 15 of the Act.

9. Accordingly, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker, Former Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court (Mob. No.9425223330) is appointed as the substitute Sole Arbitrat or to adjudicate the disputes, claims and counter -claims arising between the parties out of or in connection with the agreements executed between them.

10. The learned Sole Arbitrator shall make the disclosure under Section 12 of the Act before entering upon the reference.

11. The fee of the learned Arbitrator herein appointed shall be determined in consultation with the parties and with the consent of the learned Arbitrator.

12. The Registry is directed to send a receipt of this order to Mr.

Pritinker Diwaker , lear ned Arbitrator through all permissible modes including email.

13. The present petitions stand disposed of in the above terms.

OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J

OCTOBER 12, 2026/at