Synopsis

Dmrc filed contempt petitions alleging wilful disobedience of a division bench order dated 23.01.2026, which had directed the respondent to pay the entire license fee due under two license agreements. during the pendency of the contempt proceedings, the arbitral tribunal passed orders under section 17 directing the respondent to deposit amounts, which the respondent complied with by depositing ₹1 crore and undertaking to pay future license fees regularly. the high court disposed of the contempt petitions, holding that since the underlying directions were being complied with and the arbitrator was actively supervising the matter, no further contempt proceedings were required. liberty was granted to dmrc to approach the arbitrator if any further non‑compliance occurred.

Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sachin Datta (Single Judge)

Date of Decision: 11th May 2026

Citation: CONT.CAS(C) 730/2026 & 737/2026 (unreported)

Core Law: Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Sections 2(b), 12 (wilful disobedience); Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 17 (interim measures by arbitral tribunal).

1. Heading of the judgment

High court of delhi at new delhi

Cont.cas(c) 730/2026 & cont.cas(c) 737/2026

Delhi metro rail corporation ltd. (petitioner) vs. M/s garuda urban remedies ltd. & ors. (respondents)

Coram: hon’ble mr. justice sachin datta

Date: 11th may, 2026

2. Legal framework

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.