Pachouli Aesthetic And Wellness Pvt. Ltd v. Bright Future Enterprises & ANR.

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 1687/2025 PACHOULI AESTHETIC AND WELLNESS PVT. LTD.

.....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Navneet Tripathi and Ms. Jessica Virdi, Advs. (Through VC) versus BRIGHT FUTURE ENTERPRISES & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Ms. Medhavi Tyagi, Mr. Utsav Kumar, Mr. Devender Kumar and Ms. Anjali Singh, Adv.

Mob: 8840742699 Email: advmedhavityagi@gmail.com

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

O R D E R

% 08.05.2026 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Arbitration Act"), seeking appointment of a Sole Arbitrator for adjudication of disputes between the parties, arising out of Franchise Agreement dated 16th February, 2024 ("Franchise Agreement").

2.

This Court notes that the parties had earlier been referred to mediation vide order dated 21st January, 2026. However, as per the Mediation Report dated 06th April, 2026, the matter remains, 'Not Settled'. 3.

As per the facts on the record, the respondents entered into the Franchise Agreement with the petitioner for operating a franchise outlet under the "Pachouli" brand, as per which, the respondents were required to The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

pay 15% gross monthly revenue along with Goods and Service Tax as royalties to the petitioner.

4.

It is noted that disputes arose between the parties as the respondents were inconsistent in paying the royalties to the petitioner, and for a period from February, 2024 till April, 2025, the respondents failed to pay any royalty to the petitioner as per the terms of the Franchise Agreement. 5.

Subsequently, the respondents sent the Legal Notice dated 22nd April, 2025 to the petitioner making claims of breach by the petitioner and seeking refund of the franchise fee that was paid by the respondents to the petitioner. 6.

Towards the same, the petitioner replied by way of their Legal Notice dated 10th June, 2025, denying the allegations made by the respondents, and further invoking arbitration under Section 21 of the Arbitration Act. The respondents replied to the same by way of the Reply dated 23rd June, 2025, rejecting nomination of the Arbitrator. Hence, the present petition came to be filed.

7.

At this stage, this Court notes that the Arbitration Clause is contained in Article 27 of the Franchise Agreement between the parties, which is reproduced as under:

"xxx xxx xxx The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

xxx xxx xxx"

8.

Perusal of the aforesaid Arbitration Clause shows that there is a valid Arbitration Agreement between the parties, which stipulates that all the disputes between the parties shall be subject to exclusive jurisdiction of Delhi only. Further, the arbitration shall be held at Delhi and that the arbitration shall be conducted by a Sole Arbitrator. 9.

Today, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that she has no objection, if an Arbitrator is appointed. 10.

This Court further takes note of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner has an approximate claim of Rs. 50 Lacs.

11.

In view of the existence of a valid Arbitration Agreement between the parties, and there being disputes between the parties, which are to be adjudicated by the learned Arbitrator, through the process of arbitration, this Court finds no impediment in appointing of an Arbitrator 12.

Accordingly, considering the submissions made before this Court, the following directions are issued:

i) Mr. Siddhant Nath, Advocate, (Mob: +91-9910870397) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. ii) The remuneration of the Arbitrator shall be in terms of Schedule IV of The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

the Arbitration Act.

iii) The learned Arbitrator is requested to furnish a declaration in terms of Section 12 of the Arbitration Act prior to entering into the reference. In the event of any impediment to the Arbitrator's appointment on that count, the parties are given liberty to file an appropriate application before this Court.

iv) It shall be open to the respondents to raise counter-claims, if any, in the arbitration proceedings.

v) It is made clear that all the rights and contentions of the parties, including, as to the arbitrability of any of the claim, any other preliminary objection, as well as claims/counter-claims and merits of the dispute of either of the parties, are left open for adjudication by the learned Arbitrator.

vi) The parties shall approach the learned Arbitrator within two (02) weeks from today.

13.

Needless to state, nothing in this order shall be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case. 14.

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 15.

A copy of the order passed today, be sent to the learned Arbitrator, for information and compliance.

MINI PUSHKARNA, J MAY 8, 2026/SK The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.