Delhi HIgh Court

Delhi HC: Neutral Arbitrator Appointed in Rs. 4 Crore Dispute Over 2022 Agreement

Updated
Feb 13, 2026 7:35 PM
delhi-hc-neutral-arbitrator-appointed-in-rs-4-crore-dispute-over-2022-agreement

Summary: On January 28, 2026, the Delhi High Court decided to pick a neutral person to handle a money argument of about Rs. 4 crore between Raman Kumar and MS Skytex Unmanned Aerial Solution Private Limited. The case is about a disagreement over an agreement signed in December 2022.

The Agreement and Neutral Party Clause

The argument comes from an agreement signed on December 20, 2022. This document included a rule saying that any problems should be solved nicely within 30 days. If not, a single neutral person would be chosen by both sides or by the court if needed.

“Any disputes... shall be resolved mutually... failing amicable settlement, the matter shall be resolved through an arbitration tribunal...” — Agreement Clauses 11 and 12

Legal Actions Start

Raman Kumar started legal actions on December 2, 2024, by using the neutral party rule. His legal team, led by Mr. A. Mishra, asked the court to choose a neutral person after attempts to solve the issue didn't work.

Skytex’s Concerns and Court’s Answer

Skytex’s lawyer raised concerns, saying the original agreement wasn't shown and questioning if there was a real agreement. However, these concerns were dismissed after the original agreement was shown in court. Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar said that such concerns should be handled by the neutral person.

Choosing the Neutral Party

The court picked Mr. Ganesan Umapathy, a senior lawyer, as the neutral person. The process will follow the rules of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC).

End of Legal Actions

The court's decision makes sure that the process with the neutral person will continue smoothly, leaving all claims and counter-claims to be decided by the neutral person. The case shows the importance of having rules in agreements to solve business arguments easily.

“All rights and contentions... are kept open, to be decided by the learned Arbitrator on their merits...” — Court Order