* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 23^rd JANUARY, 2026 IN THE MATTER OF:

+ I.A. 1707/2020 & I.A. 7844/2022 IN O.M.P. (COMM) 338/2020 NHPC LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Maninder Acharya, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath, Mr. Nakul Sachdeva, Mr. Shrinkhala Tiwari, Harshit Singh and Mr. Abhinandan Sharma, Advocates versus CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S PATEL-L&T CONSORTIUM-PARBATI HE PROJECT STAGE-III .....Respondent Through: Mr. Amitesh Chand Mishra, Mr.

Prashant Kumar Mishra, Advocates CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

JUDGMENT

I.A. 1707/2020 & I.A. 7844/2022

1. The present Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as „the Arbitration Act‟) has been filed challenging the Award dated 18.04.2017 (hereinafter referred to as the „Impugned Award‟) passed by the learned Arbitral Tribunal.

2. I.A. 1707/2020 has been filed by the Petitioner under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as „the Limitation Act’

seeking condonation of delay of 2 years, 5 months and 18 days in filing the present Petition on the ground that the Petitioner was bonafidely pursuing its remedy in a Court was ultimately held by the Apex Court as one not having the territorial jurisdiction to entertain a Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

3. I.A. 7844/2022 has been filed by the Respondent under Section 3 of the Limitation Act for rejection of the present Petition on the ground that it is time-barred.

4. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts of the case, are as follows:-

a. It is stated that the Petitioner invited bids for Construction of Diversion cum Spilway Tunnel including Gates & Hoists. Rockfill Dam, Intake Structures and part Head Race Tunnel for Parbati Hydroelectric Project Stage-III, which is located in Kullu district of Himachal Pradesh.

b. It is stated that the Respondent submitted its bid and it was declared as the successful bidder, and subsequently a Contract dated 25.01.2006 (hereinafter referred to as the „Contract‟) was signed between the parties.

c. It is stated that disputes arose between the parties and the Respondent invoked the Arbitration Clause under the Contract by sending a Notice dated 05.08.2012 under Section 21 of the Arbitration Act, wherein the Respondent also appointed its nominee Arbitrator.

d. It is stated that vide its reply dated 08.09.2012, the Petitioner herein also appointed its nominee Arbitrator and both the nominee Arbitrators appointed the presiding Arbitrator.

e. The Arbitral Tribunal passed the Award dated 02.03.2017, directing the Petitioner herein to pay Rs.29,41,00,000/-, inclusive of pre-award interest from 01.02.2013 till the date of passing of the Impugned Award, along with future interest on the total amount @ 10% p.a. from the date of the Impugned Award till the date of payment.

f. It is stated that an application under Section 33(1)(a) of the Arbitration Act was filed seeking certain corrections in the Impugned Award and vide Order dated 18.04.2017, the Arbitral Tribunal passed the corrected order, thereby rectifying certain computational errors in the Impugned Award dated 02.03.2017 to the extent that the Petitioner was directed to pay Rs.29,15,00,00/-, inclusive of pre-award interest of Rs.9,84,68,055/- from 01.02.2013 till the date of passing of the Impugned Award and future interest @ 10 % p.a. from the date of passing of the Impugned Award till the date of actual payment.

g. Aggrieved by the Impugned Award, the Petitioner herein filed a Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act before the District Court at Faridabad in view of Clause 67.3 of the Contract of Conditions of Particular Application (hereinafter referred to as „the COPA’) which states that Courts at New Delhi/Faridabad will be the competent Courts for the purpose of matters arising out of the Contract.

h. In the said Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, the Respondent herein filed an Applicatio