The term 'Court' in Section 29A of the Arbitration Act must be interpreted contextually, allowing only the appointing court (High Court/Supreme Court) to exercise powers under this section, including substitution of arbitrators.

JUDGMENT :

INDEX

1. These are applications filed under Section 29(A)(4) and Section 29(A) (5) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), praying for the extension of the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal in order to complete the arbitration proceedings.

2. Since Civil Misc. Arbitration Application No.2 of 2022 and Civil Misc. Arbitration Application No.5 of 2023 raise similar question of law, they are being taken up together.

FACTS

3. The factual matrix in ARBT 2 of 2022 has been delineated below :

a. By an agreement dated February 7, 2003 executed between Taj Expressway Industrial Development Authority (now known as the Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority, hereinafter referred to as the ‘YEIDA’) and M/s Jaiprakash Industries Limited (subsequently name changed to M/s Jaipraksh Associates Limited (hereinafter referred to as the ‘JAL’), JAL was granted concession for arrangement of finances, design, engineering, construction and operation, of the expressway between Noida and Agra, and to collect & retain toll from the vehicles using the expressway during the term of 36 years, commencing from the date of commercial operation of the expressway plus any extension thereto (hereinafter referred to as the ’Yamuna Expressway Project’).

b. A Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) was incorporated by JAL for the implementation of the project under the name of Jaypee Infratech Limited (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Applicant’). All the rights and obligations of JAL under the agreement dated February 7, 2003, were transferred to the Applicant by an assignment agreement dated October 19, 2007, executed by and between YEDIA, JAL, and the Applicant. Thereafter, a project transfer agreement was executed between JAL and the Applicant on October 22, 2007, and all assets, rights, and privilege and all liabilities, obligations, and duties relating to the Yamuna Expressway Project were transferred to the Petitioner.

c. YEIDA, in discharge of its obligations under the agreement dated February 7, 2003, transferred lands for development of the Yamuna Expressway Project and other facilities etc. to the Applicant through various lease agreements. The Applicant was desirous of setting up Dhaba facility at locations namely Km 107 LHS and Km 100 RHS, respectively, across the Yamuna Expressway Project from Greater Noida to Agra. For this purpose, the Applicant, constructed & developed structures i.e. Permanent Facility Complexes at places located at Km 107 LHS and Km 100 RHS respectively.

d. M/S Ehbh Services Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the ‘opposite party No.1’) approached the Applicant to set up, operate, and run a Dhaba and submitted its offer to provide the same at both Km 107 LHS and Km 100 RHS. Thereafter, the opposite party No.1 acting through Mr. Furkan Khan, Authorized Signatory of the opposite party No.1 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘opposite party No.2’) entered into Rent Agreements on December 9, 2013, for both the locations i.e. Km 107 LHS and Km 100 RHS for the aforesaid purpose.

e. Due to certain disputes having arisen between the parties, the Applicant sent a legal notice dated January 12, 2019, under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1872 terminating the lease deed on expiry of the lease period. Thereafter, by a letter dated March 07, 2019, pursuant to Clause 14 of the agreement between the parties, the Applicant advised the opposite parties to be present for a meeting to amicably resolve the d