Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SANJEEB K.PANIGRAHI
Paradip Port Trust (PPT) – Appellant
Versus
Paresh Constructions and Foundations Pvt. Ltd. (PCFPL) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to arbitral process initiation and fee issues. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. petitioner’s arguments against section 29a application. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. opposite party's response and justification of position. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. clarification of 'entry upon reference' in arbitration. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 5. impact of fee payment on the arbitral process. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 6. judicial discretion in extending arbitration timelines. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50) |
| 7. legality of the ld. district judge's order. (Para 51 , 52 , 53) |
| 8. conclusion on the proceedings and affirming the order. (Para 54 , 55 , 56) |
| 9. final remarks and next steps for arbitral process. (Para 57 , 58 , 59 , 60) |
JUDGMENT :
Sanjeeb K. Panigrahi, J.
1. The present writ proceedings arise as a challenge to the order dated 22.12.2021 passed by the Ld. District Judge, Jagatsinghpur in ARBP No. 01 of 2018 wherein, the Ld. District Judge was pleased to extend the mandate of the arbitral proceeding for a period of six months from the date of passing of the order.
I. FACTUAL
Payment of arbitrator fees is a statutory prerequisite for an arbitral tribunal to deliver an award, and the court has limited jurisdiction to interfere with extensions granted under Section 29A.
The court can extend the mandate of arbitrators under Section 29A(5) after an award is rendered, even if done post statutory timeline, reinforcing the integrity of the arbitration process.
(1) Extension of mandate of Arbitrator(s) – Application under Section 29A(5) for extension of mandate of Arbitrator is maintainable even after expiry of time under Sections 29A(1) and (3) and even af....
(1) Arbitral award – Application for extension of time period for passing arbitral award under Section 29A(4) read with Section 29A(5) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is maintainable even a....
Extension of Sole Arbitrator's mandate under the Arbitration Act requires sufficient cause, unaffected by procedural misconduct by arbitrator, especially when delays arise from the respondent's actio....
The Court established the applicability of section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and affirmed its jurisdiction to extend the arbitral tribunal's mandat....
Refusal to extend arbitrator's mandate under Section 29A due to claimant's fault and abandonment terminates arbitral proceedings, barring fresh appointment under Section 11 by defaulting party.
The High Court has exclusive authority to extend the mandate of an arbitrator appointed under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, regardless of the pecuniary value of the claim.
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
