Samarjit Sinha v. Kisaan Infotech Limited & ANR.

$~57 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 2054/2025 SAMARJIT SINHA .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. M. Poudiuwibou, Advocate versus KISAAN INFOTECH LIMITED & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

O R D E R

% 10.12.2025 1.

The present Petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by the Petitioner seeking appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties under the Employment Agreement dated 22.09.2023. 2.

It is the case of the Petitioner that he was appointed as a Director in Kisaan Infotech Limited/Respondent No.1. It is stated that the Respondent No.1 has defaulted in payment of salary to the Petitioner from 01/01/2024 to 31/03/2024. He has also not been given reimbursement towards out of pocket expenses incurred for official work; and damages towards loss of salary due to non-compliance with the investment term sheet. Despite repeated reminders, the grievances of the Petitioner have not been addressed.

3.

A Notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, was sent to the Respondents on 24.01.2025 invoking arbitration under clause 11 of the said Agreement., which has not been replied to by the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Respondents. Paragraph 11 of the Notice under Section 21 dated 24.01.2025 reads as under:- "In view of your failure to respond to our previous notice dated 10.09.2024, we are now compelled to refer this dispute to arbitration. The issues of nonpayment of salary, non-reimbursement of expenses, and damages for the loss of opportunity and reputation remain unresolved, and thus require formal arbitration proceedings to be initiated for their resolution. We hereby notify you that My Client is referring this dispute to arbitration and requests that you respond to this notice and the issues raised therein within 10 (ten) days from the receipt of this letter."

4.

It is the case of the Petitioner that the present Petition has been filed by invoking the principle of sub-silentio under Section 7(4)(c) stating that since there is no reply to said notice, the Respondents have accepted that there is an Arbitration Clause and therefore, the disputes can be adjudicated through arbitration. The Apex Court has laid down the law on sub-silentio in 2001 (3) SCC 537 [Put judgment name]. The relevant extract is as follows: [para 10-13].

5.

It is clear from the perusal of the Apex Court judgment that the argument of the Petitioner does not hold ground as the interpretation of the Petitioner with regards to sub-silentio is flawed. 6.

The material on record reveals that there is no arbitration clause in the Employment Agreement dated 22.09.2023. Further, the Respondents did not provide their consent to refer the dispute through arbitration. 7.

In view of the absence of any of the ingredients under Section 7(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, this Court is not inclined to infer an The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Arbitration Clause on the basis of the submissions of the Petitioners and consequentially declines to refer the disputes to arbitration. 8.

The present Petition is disposed of, as dismissed. SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J DECEMBER 10, 2025 Prateek The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.