Application Seeking Extension Of Time, Can It Be Moved After Expiry Of Mandate Of Arbitrator ? Delhi High Court To Examine

The High Court of Delhi is set to examine an important issue regarding the extension of time for the delivery of the arbitral award. The bench of Justice Yogesh Khanna would decide the issue that whether an application ought to be moved by the parties under Section 29A(4) during the course of mandate of the learned arbitrator or can be moved even late. The Court was hearing petitions under Section 14(1) read with Sections 15(2) and 11(6) of the A&C Act seeking the termination of the mandate and substitution of the arbitrator on the ground that the mandate of the arbitrator stood terminated on account of lapse of time as provided under Section 29A of the Act. The petitioners submitted that the arbitrator had failed to conclude the arbitral proceedings and deliver the consequent award within the original period of 18 months including the grace period of 6 months and that no application under Section 29A(4) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act was ever moved during the continuation of the arbitration proceedings by the respondent and as such the learned arbitrator has lost the jurisdiction over the matter and hence his arbitration need to be terminated. The petitioner relied on the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in Rohan Builders (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Berger Paints India Limited[1] wherein the High Court held that the mandate of the arbitrator would stand terminated unless stood extended during subsistence. The Court observed that the issue raised by the petitioner that whether an application seeking extension of the mandate of the arbitrator should be moved during the subsistence of the mandate or can even be moved after the expiry of the mandate needs to be examined in detail. Accordingly, the Court directed the arbitrator not to proceed with the arbitral proceedings and respondent to file its response within a period of 2 weeks. Case Title: ATS Infrastructure Ltd v. Rasbehari Traders Date: 26.09.2023 Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr. Kartik Nayar and Mr. Krish Kalra Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. Apoorv Khatar and Ms. Rashi Rampal Click HereTo Read/Download Order [1] 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 266.

Application Seeking Extension Of Time, Can It Be Moved After Expiry Of Mandate Of Arbitrator ? Delhi High Court To Examine

ausaf ayyub

Tags