Legal Brief: Service on WhatsApp number and e-mail address constitutes a valid service.
Case : Lease Plan India Private Limited V. Rudraksh Pharma Distributor and ors.
Citation : 2024SCC Online Del 2687
Court : Delhi High Court
Date of Judgment : 01.04.2024
By : Adv. Aakanksha Bhatia
Facts
- The petitioner company entered into a Lease Agreement with the respondent company on March 21,
- The agreement between the parties contained an arbitration clause (Clause 2) stipulating that disputes would be adjudicated through arbitration in the jurisdiction of New Delhi according to the rules of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC).
- The Agreement also granted exclusive jurisdiction to the Courts in New
- Disputes arose between the parties, and the Petitioner invoked arbitration on December 31, 2022, by serving a legal notice to
- The Petitioner proposed three names to be appointed as arbitrator but received no response by the
- The Petitioner filed a petition before the Delhi High Court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking the appointment of an
- On 12.2023 the Court ordered to serve notices through various methods, including registered post and Speed Post. While physical service was unsuccessful, Hon’ble High Court ordered service of notice through email and WhatsApp on 12.01.2024, which was deemed sufficient because the contact information was provided in the Agreement.
Issues
- Whether the Court should appoint an arbitrator despite the Respondents not appearing in the
- Whether email and WhatsApp service is sufficient to proceed with the
Legal Analysis
- The Hon’ble Court found that email and WhatsApp service was sufficient in this case because the Agreement itself provided the Respondents’ email address and mobile number for
- The Court stated that attempting physical service at the address mentioned in the Agreement for correspondence (Clause 3) was sufficient, even though the Speed Post report indicated the Respondents were unavailable at that address.
- The Court was satisfied that an arbitration agreement existed between the parties and that the Petitioner had duly invoked arbitration
- The Court appointed DIAC to nominate an arbitrator from its panel, with proceedings to be governed by DIAC
- The Court clarified that despite the respondent’s absence, they would be served in accordance with DIAC Rules in the arbitration
Conclusion
The Court allowed the petition and referred the dispute to arbitration under DIAC. The Court confirmed that service through email and WhatsApp on the numbers provided in the Agreement was sufficient to proceed in this case. The Court’s decision highlights the importance of clear communication and agreed- upon methods of contact in contractual agreements.