Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Jyoti Singh, J.
NTPC Limited - Appellant
Versus
JSC Technopromexport - Respondent
O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 73 of 2020
Decided On : 17-02-2020
The court may grant extension of time for passing the arbitration award when complexities arise, provided all parties consent to the extension.
Headnote:(A) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 29A(4) - Petition for extension of time for passing of the Award - Extension sought due to complexity of issues; consent of parties noted - Previous extensions expired; court maintains procedural integrity while accommodating mutual agreements between parties. (Paras 1, 5, 7)
Facts of the case:
Petition filed seeking extension of time for passing of the arbitration award, with previous extensions having been granted due to complexity and mutual agreement between the parties.
Findings of Court:
Extension of time for passing of the Award is granted for an additional six months from today, regularizing the preceding period.
Issues: The main issue was whether to grant an extension for passing the Award given the complexities involved.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of procedural integrity in arbitration while also recognizing the mutual consent of the parties involved in extending the timelines for the arbitrator's decision.
Result: Petition allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. extension of time for passing of the award (Para 1 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. respondent's lack of objection to petition (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. court grants extension of time (Para 7) |
| 4. petition allowed (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT
Jyoti Singh, J. (Oral)
I.A. 2207/2020 (Exemption).
Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 73/2020
1. This is a petition filed under Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (`Act') seeking extension of time for passing of the Award.
2. Issue notice to the respondent.
3. Ms. Deepshikha, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent and submits on instructions that the respondent has no objection to the petition being allowed.
4. The Arbitral Tribunal entered upon reference on 27.10.2016. The statutory period of twelve months under Section 29A(1) of the Act expired on 26.10.2017. Mandate of the Tribunal was extended by mutual consent of both the parties, under Section 29A(3) of the Act. The extended period of six months expired on 27.04.2018. In between, an application under Section 17 of the Act was being heard by the Tribunal, which was finally disposed of on 02.04.2018. An application under Section 29A(4) was moved on 29.05.2018 before this Court for extension of time by one year. Vide order dated 01.06.2018 in OMP (MISC) (COMM) 133/2018, extension was allowed.
5. Learned counsels for the parties jointly submitted that final arguments were concluded in May 2019 but since the mandate of the Tribunal expired on 01.06.2019, the Award could not be passed. The parties thus, consented to seek extension of time. Vide order dated 30.05.2019, extension of six months was given with effect from 01.06.2019 in OMP(MISC)(COMM) 235/2019 which has also expired.
6. Learned counsels for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to an e-mail received from the Arbitrator wherein the Arbitrator has requested for an additional extension of time by about six months owing to the complex nature of the issues involved in the matter.
7. With consent of the parties, time for passing of the Award is extended by a period of six months from today i.e., 17.02.2020. The period between 01.12.2019 to 16.02.2020 is hereby regularised.
8. The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
