Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Dalmia Cement (East) Limited – Appellant
Versus
Jaiprakash Associates Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. extension of arbitral tribunal's mandate (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. notice issued and extension granted (Para 4 , 6) |
| 3. respondent supports extension request (Para 5) |
| 4. petition disposed with extension order (Para 7) |
1. The present petition filed under Section 29 A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed seeking extension of mandate of the arbitral tribunal adjudicating the disputes between the parties.
2. Pertinently, the arbitral tribunal comprising of Mr. Justice (Retd.) Arijit Pasayat, Mr. Justice (Retd.) V. N. Khare and Mr. Justice (Retd.) G.S. Singhvi was constituted on 07.07.2018 and the pleadings were completed on 09.03.2021.
3. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that on 24.12.2019 on an application filed by the petitioner [in OMP (Misc) (COMM) 541/2019] the mandate of the tribunal was extended till 31.07.2020 and thereafter, by virtue of Hon'ble Supreme Court's order in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020, the limitation period stood extended. It is prayed that the time to render the Award be extended till 30.06.2022.
4. Notice issued.
5. Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing on behalf of responde
The court upheld the extension of the arbitral tribunal's mandate under Section 29 A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, ensuring resolution of disputes while considering previous procedural del....
The court may extend the mandate of an Arbitral Tribunal in the interest of justice, upon joint request of the parties, as provided in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The court recognized that external factors such as the Covid pandemic can justify the extension of an arbitral tribunal's mandate under Section 29 A (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The court affirmed that extraordinary circumstances, such as a pandemic, can justify extending the mandate of an arbitral tribunal under Section 29 A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The court has the discretion to extend the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal in the interest of justice.
The court can extend the mandate of an Arbitral Tribunal under Section 29A(6) when there are no objections from the parties involved.
The court upheld the extension of the arbitral tribunal's mandate due to judicial suspensions of limitation periods arising from the COVID-19 pandemic, emphasizing adherence to Supreme Court directiv....
Extension of Arbitral Tribunal's mandate is permissible under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act when both parties consent.
The court extended the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal for 18 months due to lack of objection from the respondent's counsel regarding ongoing arbitration disputes.
The court's decision was influenced by the recent directions of the Supreme Court of India regarding the exclusion and restoration of the limitation period for all proceedings during the COVID-19 pan....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
