[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Intense Technologies Limited vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 5 February, 2026
$~33
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 05.02.2026
+ O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 501/2025
INTENSE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Abhinay Tiwari, Ms.
Vennela Reddy and Mr.
Mayank Bhargava, Advocates
versus
BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED .....Respondent
Through: Ms. Sangeeta Sondhi and Mr.
Amit Patra, Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN
SHANKAR
% JUDGEMENT (ORAL)
1. The present Petition, under Section 9 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 ["Act"], has been filed seeking the following
reliefs:
"a. Pass an ex-parte ad interim order restraining the Respondent, its
officers, agents, representatives and all persons acting on its behalf
from invoking, encashing or taking any steps to appropriate the
Performance Bank Guarantee of INR 2.25 Crore furnished by the
Petitioner vide PBG No. 16340100015197for the CACMS project
under Work Order No. CE/WO/02/CACMS/2016-17 dated
23.06.2016, pending the constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal and
final adjudication of disputes through arbitration;
b. Pass an ex-parte ad interim order directing the Respondent to
forthwith make arrangements for the return of all hardware,
equipment, servers, storage systems, switches and other
infrastructure deployed by the Petitioner at the Respondent's
premises for the CACMS project, and to provide the Petitioner
access to retrieve the said hardware and equipment within a period
of fifteen ( 15) days from the date of this order;
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:HARVINDER KAUR
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 501/2025 Page 1 of 5
BHATIA
Signing Date:10.02.2026
10:56:38
c. Initiate arbitration proceedings in accordance with the arbitration
clause contained in the CACMS contract for final adjudication of
all disputes between the parties including claims for compensation
for losses suffered by the Petitioner due to the Respondent's
breaches of contract.
d. Award costs of the present petition in favour of the Petitioner;
e. Pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem
fit and proper in the interests of justice."
2. Learned counsel for the Respondent submits that there was no
occasion for this Court to have passed the Order dated 05.12.2025,
whereby the encashment of the Performance Bank Guarantee
["PBG"] was stayed, contending that the said stay was granted merely
on an apprehension of encashment.
3. However, learned counsel further states that she has no
objection if the present dispute is referred to arbitration for
adjudication.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner also endorses the
consent for the appointment of an Arbitrator by this Court in the
present proceedings.
5. Since learned counsel for both parties are ad idem that the
disputes be referred to arbitration to be conducted under the aegis of
the Delhi International Arbitration Centre ["DIAC"], the same is
being considered accordingly.
6. It is noted that the learned counsel for the parties are ad idem
that the disputes between them are governed by the arbitration clause
contained in Clause 21 of the General Commercial Conditions of
Contract, as envisaged in the Tender Document dated 08.12.2015. The
parties are also in consensus regarding the appointment of an
Arbitrator. For the sake of convenience, the arbitration clause, i.e.,
Clause 21, is reproduced hereunder:
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:HARVINDER KAUR
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 501/2025 Page 2 of 5
BHATIA
Signing Date:10.02.2026
10:56:38
"21. ARBITRATION
21.1 In the event of any question, dispute or difference arising
under this agreement or in connection there-with (except as to the
matters, the decision to which is specifically provided under this
agreement), the same shall be referred to the sole arbitration of the
CMD, BSNL or in case his designation is changed or his office is
abolished, then in such cases to the sole arbitration of the officer
for the time being entrusted (whether in addition to his own duties
or otherwise) with the functions of the CMD, BSNL or by
whatever designation such an officer may be called (hereinafter
referred to as the said officer), and if the CMD or the said officer is
unable or unwilling to act as such, then to the sole arbitration of
some other person appointed by the CMD or the said officer. The
agreement to appoint an arbitrator will be in accordance with the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. There will be no objection
to any such appointment on the ground that the arbitrator is a
Government Servant or that he has to deal with the matter to which
the agreement relates or that in the course of his duties as a
Government Servant he has expressed his views on all or any of
the matters in dispute. The award of the arbitrator shall be final and
binding on both the parties to the agreement. In the event of such
an arbitrator to whom the matter is originally referred, being
transferred or vacating his office or being unable to act for any
reason whatsoever, the CMD, BSNL or the said officer shall
appoint another person to act as an arbitrator in accordance with
terms of the agreement and the person so appointed shall be
entitled to proceed from the stage at which it was left out by his
predecessors.
21.2 The arbitrator may from time to time with the consent of both
the parties enlarge the time frame for making and publishing the
award. Subject to the aforesaid, Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996 and the rules made there under, any modification thereof for
the time being in force shall be deemed to apply to the arbitration
proceeding under this clause.
21.3 The venue of the arbitration proceeding shall be the office of
the CMD, BSNL, New Delhi or such other places as the arbitrator,
may decide."
7. In view of the consensus regarding the appointment of an
Arbitrator, the parties expressly waive the mandate of the arbitration
clause insofar as it relates to the procedure for the appointment of the
Arbitrator. The parties also waive the requirement of issuance of a
formal notice under Section 21 of the Act, as well as the necessity of
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:HARVINDER KAUR
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 501/2025 Page 3 of 5
BHATIA
Signing Date:10.02.2026
10:56:38
filing a petition under Section 11 of the Act.
8. Since the parties have mutually consented to the appointment of
an Arbitrator, and this Court is of the view that the commencement of
arbitral proceedings should not be unduly delayed, it would be in the
interest of justice that an Arbitrator be appointed.
9. It is noted that the parties are ad idem that the value of the
disputes is approximately ₹13 Crore.
10. Accordingly, this Court requests Hon'ble Mr. Justice
Dharmesh Sharma (Retd.), (E-mail id-
[email protected]) to enter into the reference as
the learned Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes as between the parties.
11. The arbitration proceedings shall be conducted under the aegis
of the DIAC and shall be governed by its rules and regulations. The
learned Arbitrator shall be entitled to fees in accordance with the
Schedule of Fees prescribed by the DIAC.
12. The learned Arbitrator is also requested to file the requisite
disclosure under Section 12(2) of the Act within a week of entering of
reference.
13. The Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the
learned Arbitrator through all permissible modes, including electronic
mail.
14. All rights and contentions of the parties, including those relating
to claims and counter-claims, are kept open and shall be adjudicated
by the learned Arbitrator on their merits, in accordance with law.
Needless to say, nothing contained in this order shall be construed as
an expression of opinion by this Court on the merits of the disputes
between the parties.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:HARVINDER KAUR
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 501/2025 Page 4 of 5
BHATIA
Signing Date:10.02.2026
10:56:38
15. The amended petition filed pursuant to the liberty granted to the
Petitioner vide Order dated 05.12.2025 shall be treated as an
application under Section 17 of the Act, and appropriate directions
may be passed by the learned Arbitrator after entering upon the
reference.
16. So far as the stay on encashment of the PBG granted vide
Order dated 05.12.2025 is concerned, the said status quo shall
continue until the learned Arbitrator enters upon the reference and
takes up the Section 17 application for consideration.
17. The parties are at liberty to raise all objections, including with
respect to the jurisdiction of the Arbitrator, before the learned Arbitral
Tribunal.
18. Let a copy of this Order be transmitted to the DIAC for
necessary information and action.
19. Accordingly, the present Petition, along with all pending
Application(s), if any, is disposed of.
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.
FEBRUARY 5, 2026/ rk/va/dj
