Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
P.SAM KOSHY, J
ESI Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Quality Care India Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction of courts in arbitration extensions (Para 1 , 4 , 6) |
| 2. arguments on jurisdiction and court authority (Para 8 , 10) |
| 3. rationale for judges' determination of jurisdiction (Para 12 , 18) |
| 4. legislative intent and power distinction in arbitration (Para 15 , 20) |
| 5. final decision on civil revision petition (Para 21 , 22) |
ORDER :
1. The present Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and Section 29A (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dated 24.03.2025 in Arbitration O.P.No.172 of 2023 passed by the XXIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, at Hyderabad (for short ‘the impugned order’)
2. Heard Mr. G. Pavan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner; and Mr. S. Ravi, learned Senior Counsel representing M/s.R.S. Associates, learned counsel for the respondents.
3. Vide the impugned order, the Trial Court allowed the above A.O.P. by granting extension of period of (08) months from the date of order for completion of arbitral proceedings by the learned Arbitrator subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- payable to the District Legal Services Authority.
4.
Jurisdiction for extending arbitration periods falls to District Courts under Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration Act, distinct from High Court powers under Section 11(6).
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.
The High Court has jurisdiction to extend time for arbitration proceedings, provided the arbitrator was appointed by it, reflecting legislative intent requiring contextual interpretation of 'Court' i....
The main legal point established is that the jurisdiction and applicability of Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 should be considered in the context of the appointing authorit....
The High Court has the authority to extend the mandate of the Arbitrator if the arbitration proceeding could not be concluded within a reasonable time, as per Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conci....
The court clarified that the power to extend the mandate of the arbitrator under Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act can be exercised even after the expiry of the specified period,....
The court clarified that applications for extending the mandate of an arbitral tribunal under Section 29A must be filed before the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction, not the High Court.
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
