IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____ OF 2025
In the matter of: The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (as amended)
And
In the matter of:
Clause 14 of the Supply Agreement dated 15.01.2023 between Sunrise Technologies Private Limited
and Quantum Solutions Limited
SUNRISE TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED
A company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013,
having its registered office at:
Tech Park, Plot No. 42, Sector 18,
Gurugram - 122001, Haryana
Through its Authorized Representative,
Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Director
...APPLICANT/PETITIONER
VERSUS
QUANTUM SOLUTIONS LIMITED
A company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013,
having its registered office at:
Quantum Tower, 7th Floor, M.G. Road,
Mumbai - 400001, Maharashtra
Through its Authorized Representative,
Ms. Priya Mehta, Managing Director
...RESPONDENT
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 11(6) READ WITH SECTION 11(12) OF THE ARBITRATION AND
CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 FOR APPOINTMENT OF SOLE ARBITRATOR
TO,
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND
HIS COMPANION JUDGES OF THE HON'BLE
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
THE HUMBLE APPLICATION OF THE
PETITIONER ABOVE NAMED:
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. The present Application under Section 11(6) read with Section 11(12) of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") is being filed by the Applicant
seeking appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes and differences that
have arisen between the Applicant and the Respondent under the Supply Agreement dated
15.01.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement").
2. The Applicant is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013, having its
registered office at Tech Park, Plot No. 42, Sector 18, Gurugram - 122001, Haryana. The
Applicant is engaged in the business of manufacturing and supplying computer hardware
components to various technology companies across India.
3. The Respondent is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013, having its
registered office at Quantum Tower, 7th Floor, M.G. Road, Mumbai - 400001, Maharashtra.
The Respondent is engaged in the business of assembling and selling computers and laptops
to retail customers.
4. The Applicant and the Respondent entered into a Supply Agreement dated 15.01.2023,
whereby the Applicant agreed to supply computer processors, motherboards, and RAM
modules to the Respondent for a period of two years, as per the specifications and quantities
mentioned in the Agreement. A copy of the Agreement is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE
A-1.
ARBITRATION AGREEMENT:
5. Clause 14 of the Agreement contains the Arbitration Clause, which reads as follows: "14.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION: 14.1 Any dispute, controversy, or claim arising out of or relating to
this Agreement, or the breach, termination, or invalidity thereof, shall be settled by
arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the
amendments thereto. 14.2 The arbitration tribunal shall consist of a sole arbitrator to be
appointed by mutual agreement of the Parties within 30 days from the date of receipt of a
written notice of arbitration by either Party. 14.3 If the Parties fail to appoint the arbitrator
within the stipulated period, either Party may approach the appropriate court for
appointment of an arbitrator in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996. 14.4 The seat and venue of arbitration shall be Mumbai,
Maharashtra, and the language of the arbitration proceedings shall be English. 14.5 The
arbitration award shall be final and binding on both Parties."
CAUSE OF ACTION:
6. The Applicant states that as per the Agreement, the Applicant was required to supply 5,000
units of processors, 3,000 units of motherboards, and 8,000 units of RAM modules to the
Respondent every quarter, at prices specified in Schedule A of the Agreement.
7. The Applicant duly supplied the agreed components to the Respondent for the first three
quarters, i.e., from January 2023 to September 2023, and raised invoices accordingly. The
Respondent made payments for the supplies delivered in the first two quarters, i.e., January
2023 to June 2023.
8. However, the Respondent defaulted in making payments for the supplies delivered in the
third quarter, i.e., July 2023 to September 2023, amounting to Rs. 4,25,00,000/- (Rupees
Four Crores Twenty-Five Lakhs Only), despite repeated reminders and notices from the
Applicant. Copies of the invoices and reminders are annexed herewith as ANNEXURE A-2.
9. Due to non-payment of outstanding dues, the Applicant suspended further supplies to the
Respondent from October 2023 onwards, in accordance with Clause 9.2 of the Agreement,
which entitled the Applicant to suspend performance of its obligations in case of non-
payment by the Respondent for a period exceeding 60 days.
10. The Respondent, vide its letter dated 25.11.2023, claimed that the components supplied by
the Applicant in the third quarter were defective and did not meet the agreed specifications,
resulting in a high rate of returns from the Respondent's customers. The Respondent sought
a credit note for the alleged defective supplies and demanded compensation for the loss of
business and reputation. A copy of the Respondent's letter is annexed herewith as
ANNEXURE A-3.
11. The Applicant, vide its reply dated 10.12.2023, denied all allegations regarding defective
supplies and maintained that all components supplied were in perfect working condition and
met the agreed specifications. The Applicant reiterated its demand for payment of the
outstanding amount of Rs. 4,25,00,000/- and threatened legal action in case of continued
default. A copy of the Applicant's reply is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE A-4.
12. The Respondent, vide its letter dated 30.12.2023, proposed to pay 50% of the outstanding
amount immediately and the balance after a joint inspection of the allegedly defective
components. The Respondent also expressed its intention to terminate the Agreement in
case the matter was not resolved amicably. A copy of the Respondent's letter is annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE A-5.
13. The Applicant, vide its letter dated 15.01.2024, rejected the Respondent's proposal and
insisted on full payment of the outstanding amount. The Applicant also objected to any
unilateral termination of the Agreement and stated that any such action would constitute a
breach of the Agreement. A copy of the Applicant's letter is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE
A-6.
14. The Respondent, vide its letter dated 31.01.2024, purported to terminate the Agreement
with immediate effect, citing material breach by the Applicant in supplying defective
components and suspending further supplies. A copy of the Respondent's letter is annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE A-7.
15. The Applicant, vide its letter dated 15.02.2024, disputed the validity of the purported
termination and invoked the arbitration clause contained in Clause 14 of the Agreement. The
Applicant nominated Justice (Retd.) A.K. Sharma as the sole arbitrator and requested the
Respondent to confirm its concurrence within 30 days, as stipulated in Clause 14.2 of the
Agreement. A copy of the Applicant's arbitration notice is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE
A-8.
16. The Respondent, vide its letter dated 28.02.2024, acknowledged receipt of the arbitration
notice but objected to the appointment of Justice (Retd.) A.K. Sharma as the sole arbitrator,
alleging that he had previously represented the Applicant in another matter. The Respondent
proposed the appointment of Justice (Retd.) S.M. Patel as the sole arbitrator instead. A copy
of the Respondent's reply is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE A-9.
17. The Applicant, vide its letter dated 10.03.2024, denied any previous association with Justice
(Retd.) A.K. Sharma but, in the interest of an impartial arbitration process, proposed Justice
(Retd.) R.K. Mishra as an alternative sole arbitrator. The Applicant requested the Respondent
to confirm its concurrence within 15 days. A copy of the Applicant's letter is annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE A-10.
18. The Respondent, vide its letter dated 20.03.2024, rejected the Applicant's proposal and
reiterated its nomination of Justice (Retd.) S.M. Patel as the sole arbitrator. A copy of the
Respondent's letter is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE A-11.
19. The Applicant, vide its letter dated 01.04.2024, proposed a third name, Justice (Retd.) P.L.
Gupta, as the sole arbitrator and requested the Respondent to confirm its concurrence
within 10 days, failing which the Applicant would approach this Hon'ble Court for
appointment of an arbitrator. A copy of the Applicant's letter is annexed herewith as
ANNEXURE A-12.
20. The Respondent, vide its letter dated 10.04.2024, rejected the Applicant's proposal and
maintained its nomination of Justice (Retd.) S.M. Patel as the sole arbitrator. A copy of the
Respondent's letter is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE A-13.
21. Despite the exchange of multiple correspondences, the parties have failed to reach a
consensus on the appointment of a sole arbitrator within the stipulated period of 30 days
from the date of receipt of the arbitration notice, as required under Clause 14.2 of the
Agreement.
22. In view of the aforesaid, the Applicant is constrained to approach this Hon'ble Court under
Section 11(6) of the Act for the appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes
between the parties.
GROUNDS FOR RELIEF:
23. The Applicant has invoked the arbitration clause contained in the Agreement vide its notice
dated 15.02.2024.
24. Despite several attempts, the parties have failed to agree on the appointment of a sole
arbitrator within the stipulated period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the arbitration
notice.
25. As per Clause 14.3 of the Agreement, in case of failure to appoint an arbitrator within the
stipulated period, either party may approach the appropriate court for appointment of an
arbitrator in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
26. Section 11(6) of the Act provides that where the parties fail to agree on the appointment of
an arbitrator within 30 days from receipt of a request by one party from the other party to so
agree, the appointment shall be made, upon request of a party, by the court.
27. The seat and venue of arbitration, as per Clause 14.4 of the Agreement, is Mumbai,
Maharashtra. Therefore, this Hon'ble Court has jurisdiction to entertain the present
Application.
28. The Applicant has paid the requisite court fees for filing the present Application.
29. The Applicant has not filed any other application or petition before any other court or
tribunal seeking the same or similar relief.
PRAYER:
In view of the facts and circumstances stated above, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble
Court may be pleased to:
a) Appoint a suitable person as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes and differences that
have arisen between the Applicant and the Respondent under the Supply Agreement dated
15.01.2023;
b) Direct that the fees of the arbitrator shall be borne equally by both parties, as per the Fourth
Schedule to the Act;
c) Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE APPLICANT, AS IN DUTY BOUND, SHALL EVER PRAY.
Place: Mumbai
Date: 15.04.2024
FILED BY:
ABC & ASSOCIATES
ADVOCATES FOR THE APPLICANT
CHAMBER NO. 456, 4TH FLOOR,
BOMBAY HIGH COURT,
MUMBAI - 400032
VERIFICATION
I, Rajiv Sharma, son of Shri Mahesh Sharma, aged about 45 years, Director of Sunrise Technologies
Private Limited, having its registered office at Tech Park, Plot No. 42, Sector 18, Gurugram - 122001,
Haryana, do hereby verify that the contents of paragraphs 1 to 22 are true to my knowledge and the
contents of paragraphs 23 to 29 are believed to be true on legal advice, and that I have not
suppressed any material fact.
Verified at Mumbai on this 15th day of April, 2024.
DEPONENT
