Delhi High Court Appoints Arbitrator to Resolve Football Club Expulsion Dispute

The Delhi High Court fast-tracked the resolution of a governance dispute in the Delhi Soccer Association, ensuring that arbitrary expulsions do not derail upcoming democratic elections. In an urgent intervention, the court bypassed formal appointment procedures to install an arbitrator tasked with deciding the participation rights of a football club within a ten-day window.

Justice Om Prakash Shukla presided over the matter, where the petitioners challenged their sudden exclusion from the electoral process. The bench acted upon an urgent petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, noting that the proximity of the scheduled elections necessitated an immediate and binding adjudicatory mechanism.

The court noted the consensus between the parties to refer the matter to arbitration, effectively converting the Section 9 petition into an application for interim measures under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Court Observations on Procedural Compliance

The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "The Petitioners and Respondent No. 2 waive the requirement of following the formal procedure and the agreed mechanism for appointment of the Arbitral Tribunal and consent to the appointment of an arbitrator by this Court. Having regard to the prima facie existence of the arbitration clause and the disputes which have arisen thereunder, this Court finds no impediment in appointing a Sole Arbitrator."

The Court has following directions:

"Ms. Manisha Suri, Advocate is appointed as a learned Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes arisen between the parties. Upon constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal, the present Section 9 application shall be treated as Section 17 application. The learned Sole Arbitrator will proceed to the arbitration proceedings subject to furnishing requisite disclosures as required under Section 12(2) of the Act. The arbitration shall be carried under the rules and aegis of Delhi International Arbitration Centre ('DIAC'). It shall be open to the parties to raise all pleas, including objection as to arbitrability and jurisdiction, before the learned Sole Arbitrator who shall decide the same in accordance with law. The learned Sole Arbitrator is requested to decide the matter within a period of 10 days from today."

Background

The dispute arose when Ajmal FC and its representative moved the Court against a communication dated September 26, 2026. This communication, purportedly issued by the President of the Delhi Soccer Association (DSA) whose tenure had allegedly expired, expelled the club indefinitely and banned Petitioner No. 2 for two years. The petitioners argued that these actions were taken without a show-cause notice or a hearing, directly resulting in their omission from the draft electoral list for the DSA elections scheduled for October 18, 2026.

During the hearing, Respondent No. 2 accepted notice and both parties agreed that the dispute should be adjudicated via arbitration. The Court, recognizing the urgency of the upcoming elections, appointed a Sole Arbitrator and directed that the matter be resolved within ten days, ensuring that the petitioners' rights regarding the electoral process could be adjudicated on their merits without delay.

Case Details:
Case No.: O.M.P.(I) 15/2026
Case Title: AJMAL FC AND ANR v. SH ANUJ GUPTA AND ORS
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Jagjit Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Preet Singh, Mr. Abhijeet Singh, Ms. Swati Mishra and Mr. Chandresh Pratap, Advocates.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Om Prakash, Advocate for R-2.

Source: 2026 CaseBase(DEL) 6669