$~59 
* IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW  DELHI 
# CNR No. DLHC010077922026 
+  O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 82/2026 
 FATEH EDUCATION CONSULTING PRIVATE LIMITED 
.....Petitioner 
Through: Mr. Aquib Ali, Ms. Amreen Khaliq and Mr. Tarush Verma, Advocates.  
 
    versus 
 
 DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD 
.....Respondent 
    Through: Ms. Drishti Kochhar, Advocate. 
 
 CORAM: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA 
    ORDER (ORAL) 
%         30.09.2026 
1. The present petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:  


 
“a) Direct the Respondent and/or their agents, successors, assignees, and any other person claiming through them to maintain status quo with respect to the entire beautification work, including but not limited to the branding and balloons installed at the Pillars of the Patel Nagar Metro Station until the dispute is duly adjudicated by an appropriate forum of Conciliator / Arbitrator; and/or. 
 
b) Restrain the Respondents and/or their agents, successors, assignees, and any other person claiming through them from taking any coercive actions as threatened by them in their letter dated 11.02.2026 and 13.02.2026 from removing any of the beautification work carried out by the Petitioner for imparting a “pleasing look and feel” on the pillars of the Patel Nagar Metro Station’ 
 
c) Pass any such orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 
 
2. The facts of the matter, briefly put are that Petitioner was granted exclusive co-branding rights in respect of Patel Nagar Metro Station by Respondent under a License Agreement dated 29.01.2024 for a period of ten years.  


 
3. Under the Agreement, the Petitioner was permitted, subject to Respondent’s approval to undertake branding, painting, colour schemes, graphics, refurbishment and other works intended to impart a pleasing “look and feel” to the station.  


 
4. Pursuant thereto, the Petitioner carried out beautification works, including installation of a balloon theme on the pillars of the station, which it claims were undertaken pursuant to drawings, approvals, communications and no-objection issued by Respondent. 


 
5. It is alleged that in or around February 2026, Respondent issued notices requiring removal of signage works from the pillars, following which the Petitioner allegedly removed the signage bearing its name but retained the balloon installation. 


 
6. The Respondent’s case is that although the balloon theme had been approved, the balloon panels supported by the iron frames on pillars Nos. 180–190 were not approved and interfered with exclusive outdoor advertisement rights subsequently granted to M/s Jagran Engage under an agreement dated 16.10.2025. 


 
7. Consequently, the Petitioner thereafter invoked the contractual 


conciliation mechanism and approached this court under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 19961 seeking interim protection against removal of the beautification works. 


1 “Act” hereinafter 
 
8. While the conciliation talks were ongoing, this court by order dated 24.03.2026 directed status quo. 


 
9. In these circumstances, the Petitioner is directed to take appropriate steps for initiation of the arbitral proceedings and constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal in accordance with the Arbitration Agreement between the parties if the conciliation mechanism fails. 


 
10. The interim arrangement granted vide order dated 24.03.2026 shall continue for a period of 90 days from the date of this order. 


 
11. It shall be open to the learned Arbitral Tribunal, upon consideration of the matter on its own merits, to continue, modify, vary or vacate the aforesaid interim arrangement. 


 
12. All rights and contentions of the parties are left open and nothing contained in this order shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the disputes. 


 
13. Upon constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal, the present petition shall be treated as an application under Section 17 of the Act and shall be placed before the learned Arbitral Tribunal for consideration in accordance with law. 


 
14. For the sake of clarity, the Petitioner is directed to initiate arbitral proceedings within a period of 90 days from today. It is further clarified that the interim arrangement granted under the present order shall continue only for the said period and shall thereafter stand automatically vacated, without requiring any further order of the Court. 


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


 
 
 
OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J 
SEPTEMBER 30, 2026/pa