* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 254/2023 EMCO LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Bhargavi Kannan, Mr. Abhijeet Swaroop and Ms. Shivani Karmakar, Advs.

versus DELHI TRANSCO LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr. Viksit Arora, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL)

% 13.09.2024

1. This is a petition under Section 29A(4), $~59 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, 2“the1996Act”,hereinafter by the petitioner seeking extension of the mandate of a three-member learned Arbitral Tribunal in seisin of the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent.

2. The petition has been vehemently opposed by Mr. Viksit Arora, learned Counsel for the respondent.

1(4) If the award is not made within the period specified in sub-section (1) or the extended period specified under sub-section (3), the mandate of the arbitrator(s) shall terminate unless the court has, either

priortooraftertheexpiryoftheperiodsospecified,extendedtheperiod:

Provided that while extending the period under this sub-section, if the court finds that the proceedingshavebeendelayedforthereasonsattributabletothearbitraltribunal,then,itmayorderreduction offeesofarbitrator(s)bynotexceedingfivepercentforeachmonthofsuchdelay:

Provided further that where an application under sub-section (5) is pending, the mandate of the arbitratorshallcontinuetillthedisposalofthesaidapplication:

Provided also that the arbitrator shall be given an opportunity of being heard before the fees is reduced.

Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified

3. The disputes arose in the context of a Contract Agreement dated 30 January 2009. Notice was issued by the petitioner to the respondent under Section 21 of the 1996 Act, invoking arbitration, on

17 July 2018.

4. A three-member arbitral tribunal came into existence, which conducted its first hearing on 22 October 2018. Statement of Claim was filed by the petitioner before the learned Arbitral Tribunal on 21 November 2018. Statement of defence and counter claims were filed by the respondent on 18 February 2019.

5. On 19 February 2019, the learned Arbitral Tribunal directed the petitioner to file rejoinder and pay the fees of the arbitration.

6. The next order which came to be passed by the learned Arbitral Tribunal on 3 July 2019 is the matter of some debate and requires, therefore, to be extracted in extenso, thus:

“

“PRESENT:

FortheClaimant Ms.TaneshaSultanSingh,Advocate Ms.AparajitaUpadhyay, Advocate FortheRespondent Mr.Prashant Mehta,Advocate Mr.Jagat Singh,Manager(T)

Mr.Kailash Chand,Manager(T) Mr.GauravGupta,Manager(T)

Mr.Umesh Kaushal,AM (T)

MINUTES OF PROCEEDING DATED 03.07.2019 HELD AT GH ARBITRATION CENTRE, A-8, PAMPOSH ENCLAVE, G.K.- I,NEWDELHI.

Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified

5^th SITTING

1. In this matter the Arbitral Tribunal held its first sitting on 22.10.2018. On this date the Tribunal gave various practice and procedural directions to both the parties and also set down the schedule for completing pleadings in the matter. The Tribunal also directed both the parties to deposit a tentative amount of Rs.2.5 Lacs each in favour of each member of the Tribunal within a period of four weeks pending fixation of arbitration fee payable to themembers oftheTribunal.

2. In compliance of the directions given by the Tribunal vide order dated 22.10.2018, the Claimant had filed their Statement of Claim alongwith documents and the Respondent has filed their Statement of Defence alongwith Counter Claim. In its sitting held on 19.02.2019, the Tribunal directed the Claimant to file their rejoinder to the Statement of Defence and reply to the Counter claim within a period of five weeks i.e. on or before 26.03.2019. In this order the Tribunal also observed that the Claimant has not so far deposited tentative fee for an amount of Rs.2.5 Lacs in favour of each member of the Tribunal and therefore, the Claimant shall deposit thesame withina periodoftwo weeks. In this veryorder, it was further directed that both