- Court
- High Court of Delhi
- Decided
- 19 August 2026
- Bench
- Amit Bansal
- Case no.
- W.P.(C) 11481/2026
Follow Delhi High CourtFollow Amit Bansal
Judgment
O R D E R %
19.08.2026
¶1The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the demand notice dated 25th June, 2026 issued by the respondent no.1/IRCTC raising a demand of Rs.1,74,97,100/- against the petitioner in respect of additional license fee for Train No.12839-40.
¶2Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the aforesaid demand was premised on the letters This is a digitally signed order. W.P.(C) 11481/2026 dated 8th April, 2022 (Annexure P-2 to the writ petition) and 8th February, 2023 (Annexure P-3 to the writ petition) which have been held to be unenforceable in arbitration proceedings between another similarly placed entity and the respondent no.1/IRCTC.
¶3After some hearing, Mr. Dayan Krishnan and Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner on instructions submit that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to invoke the arbitration clause under the contract.
¶4Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of while granting liberty to the petitioner to invoke the arbitration clause in accordance with law.
¶5Mr. Krishnan submits that two (2) weeks' time may be given to the petitioner to take steps towards invoking the remedy of arbitration and status quo may prevail for this period of two (2) weeks.
¶6Mr. Saurabh Agrawal, counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1/IRCTC submits that out of the three (3) bank guarantees, two (2) have already been invoked and encashed.
6.1. This is disputed by the counsel for the petitioner.
¶7Accordingly, without going into the merits of the case, in order for the petitioner to avail remedies that may be available in law, it is directed that status quo shall be maintained for a period of two (2) weeks from today.
¶8Pending application stands disposed of. AMIT BANSAL, J AUGUST 19, 2026 Vivek/- This is a digitally signed order.
Case details
Parties and counsel
W.P.(C) 11481/2026 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010368852026 + W.P.(C) 11481/2026 with CM APPL. 53118/2026 SATYAM CATERERS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan and Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, Sr. Advocates with Mr. Vijay Kaundal, Mr. Nitish Kant Sharma, Ms. Sapna Jha, Mr. Dipanshu Gaba, Mr. Shreedhar Kali, Ms. Radhika and Mr. Sukrit, Advocates. versus INDIAN RAILWAY CATERING AND TOURISM CORPORATION LIMITED & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Saurav Agrawal, Ms. Kiran Devrani, Mr. Anshuman Chowdhury, Mr. Parmeet Singh, Ms. Nikita Rathi and Ms. Samayra Adlakha, Advocates for IRCTC. Mr. Kartik Khokhar and Mr. Ashish Sharma, Advocates for R-2. Mr. Brijesh K. Tamber, Mr. Yashu Rustagi and Ms. Chanchala Kumari, Advocates for Indian Bank/R-5 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.