Application For Extension Of Time Cannot Be Dismissed Due To Mentioning S.151 Of CPC Instead Of S. 29A Of Arbitration Act: Himachal Pradesh HC

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Rakesh Kainthla has held that it is well-settled law that mere mentioning of an incorrect provision is not fatal to the application if the power to pass such an order is available with the court. Brief Facts: The applicant/petitioner has filed an application under Section 151 of CPC for extension of time to comply with the order dated 30.10.2023 passed in arbitration case No. 799 of 2023. The applicant/petitioner filed a petition before the Court seeking an extension of time to enable the arbitrator to conclude the arbitration proceedings in reference No. 1376 of 2017. This petition was disposed of by this Court on 30.10.2023 by allowing the extension of time enabling the learned arbitrator to conclude the proceedings within six months. Learned counsel representing the petitioner intimated this fact to the learned counsel appearing before the learned Arbitrator. He asked the learned counsel to download the copy of the order but he failed to do so. Learned Arbitrator could not take up the matter in the absence of the order extending the time and the time granted by this Court stood expired. Contentions: The petititoner submitted that the order was conveyed to the learned counsel representing the petitioner before the learned Arbitrator, however, he failed to download the order and appear before the learned Arbitrator. Since the order was not conveyed to the learned Arbitrator, he could not proceed further in the matter. The other cases have already been decided; therefore, he prayed that the present application be allowed and the time be extended. Refuting the submission, the respondent submitted that the present application under Section 151 CPC is not maintainable as a specific provision exists under Section 29 (A) (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The petitioners were negligent in not appearing before the learned Arbitrator and there is no sufficient cause for extending the period. NHAI would be forced to deposit the interest for an extended period. Observations: The court noted that a specific section in the form of section 29A exists in the Arbitration Act for the same purpose for which this application has been filed. In My Palace Mutually Aided Coop. Society v. B. Mahesh, 2022 the Supreme Court held that “Section 151 of the CPC can only be applicable if there is no alternate remedy available in accordance with the existing provisions of law. Such inherent power cannot override statutory prohibitions or create remedies which are not contemplated under the Code.” Based on the above, the court observed that the application under Section 151 CPC would not be maintainable when specific provision under Section 29 A (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act exists to extend the time. However, the court further noted that this will not make much difference as the Supreme Court in Pruthvirajsinh Nodhubha Jadeja v. Jayeshkumar Chhakaddas Shah, (2019) held that “It is well-settled law that mere non- mentioning of a correct provision is not fatal to the application if the power to pass such an order is available with the court.” It opined that the application cannot be dismissed on the ground that Section 151 of CPC was mentioned instead of Section 29 A (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Accordingly, the present application was allowed on the ground that the petitioner could not be penalised for the fault of his counsel in sending the order to the Arbitrator and time was extended. Case Title: Mangal Chand and ors vs. LAC NHAI and ors. Case Number:Arb. Case No. 799 of 2023 Judgment Date: 10/01/2025 Mr. Rohan Thakur, Advocate, vice Mr. Maan Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, Additional Advocate General, for the respondents No.1 and 3-State. Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.2 Click Here To Read/Download The Order

Application For Extension Of Time Cannot Be Dismissed Due To Mentioning S.151 Of CPC Instead Of S. 29A Of Arbitration Act: Himachal Pradesh HC

Mohd Malik Chauhan

Tags