Case Name: Newgen Digitalworks Pvt Ltd v. Peter Lang Group AG
Petition: Arbitration Petition No. 47/2025 under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
Court/Authority: Supreme Court of India, Civil Original Jurisdiction
Order No.: Not explicitly numbered; order dated 26 May 2026
Date of Order: 26‑05‑2026
Period of Dispute: Obligations arising under Master Services Agreement (MSA) and Statement of Work (SOW) dated 20 Jan 2020; unpaid dues accrued up to the filing of notice on 21 Nov 2024
Parties Involved
Petitioner: Newgen Digitalworks Pvt Ltd, Indian private limited company engaged in end‑to‑end publishing, BPO and IT‑enabled services.
Respondent: Peter Lang Group AG, Swiss‑registered entity (formerly Peter Lang Copyright AG) engaged in publishing humanities/social sciences textbooks.
Other Entities Mentioned:
Peter Lang AG (PLAG), the original Swiss entity with which the MSA/SOW were initially executed.
Konvertus B.V., Dutch subsidiary of Newgen that originally rendered services to PLAG.
Debt Transfer Agreement (DTA) dated 02 Jul 2020, executed among Newgen, Respondent, and PLAG, effecting transfer of liabilities.
Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Anirudh Wadhwa, Mr. Debarshi Chakraborty, Mr. Sriram Venkatavaradan, Mr. Shivendra Singh, AOR Ms. Prakriti Rastogi, Ms. Aryama Singh Rajput.
Counsel for Respondent: Mr. Aakash Bajaj, Ms. Prerona Banerjee, Khaitan & Co., AOR.
Issues / Allegations / Violations
Respondent allegedly failed to pay outstanding dues under the MSA and SOW, amounting to CHF 2,986,128.
Respondent contended that the arbitration agreement was not binding because the MSA/SOW were executed with PLAG, a distinct legal entity, not with the Respondent.
Petitioner's claim rests on the Debt Transfer Agreement (02 Jul 2020) whereby the Respondent assumed PLAG’s liabilities under the MSA/SOW.
Findings & Observations
The Court examined the terms of the MSA, SOW, and the Debt Transfer Agreement, concluding that the Respondent had legally assumed the obligations of PLAG.
The Court found the Petitioner's request for appointment of a sole arbitrator under Clause 9.2 of the MSA to be justified.
No substantive assessment of the monetary claim was made; the focus was on procedural entitlement to arbitration.
Penalties / Settlements / Directions
Arbitrator Appointment: Hon’ble Mr. Justice C. Nagappan (former Judge of the Supreme Court of India) appointed as Sole Arbitrator.
Seat & Venue: Chennai, India, as stipulated in the arbitration agreement.
Remuneration: The Sole Arbitrator is empowered to fix his own fees.
Interlocutory Applications: All pending interlocutory applications, if any, are disposed of.
Corrective Actions & Future Obligations
Parties are free to raise all contentions before the appointed Sole Arbitrator.
The Sole Arbitrator will conduct the arbitration proceedings, determine liability, and award any monetary relief, if applicable.
The parties must comply with the arbitrator’s procedural orders and eventual award.
Final Ruling & Enforcement
The Supreme Court allows the Arbitration Petition and appoints Justice C. Nagappan as Sole Arbitrator.
The arbitration will be seated in Chennai, India.
All pending applications are dismissed.
The order is signed by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymala Bagchi on 26 May 2026.
