$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 12.03.2026 Judgment pronounced on: 01.04.2026 + O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 384/2024, I.A. 10888/2024 (Ex.) &

I.A. 38745/2024 (Stay)

SP SINGLA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Anirudh Wadhwa, Mr.

Kartik Gupta and Mr. Vibhu Pahuja, Advocates.

versus STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sachin Kumar, Additional Advocate General, Mr. Kumar Anurag Singh and Mr. Zain A. Khan, Advocates, for Respondent No. 1.

Ms. Astha Sharma and Mr. Nikhil Anand, Advocates, for Respondent No. 2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

J U D G M E N T

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.

1. The present Petition has been instituted under Sub-sections (4) and (5) of Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, A&C Act, inter alia, seeking the regularisation of the period commencing from 03.12.2023 and the grant of a further extension of twelve months, or such period as this Court may deem fit and appropriate, for the continuation of the mandate of the learned Arbitral Tribunal.

2. At the outset, it is noted that Respondent No. 1 has raised a preliminary objection with respect to the jurisdiction of this Court, which has been duly contested by the Petitioner. It is evident that, should the objection as to jurisdiction be sustained in the present adjudication, the Petition itself would not survive for consideration, and consequently, the reliefs sought by the Petitioner herein would not be liable to be granted.

BRIEF FACTS

3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the material facts germane to the institution of the present Petition are set out hereunder:

(a). The parties entered into an Agreement dated 25.05.2019, Agreement for the „Construction of a 4-Lane Elevated Corridor with Cable- Stayed Bridge and Approach Road for Anna Chowk-Gobindpur Bypass Road at Jamshedpur, having a total length of 1540 metres, on EPC mode‟.

(b). Alleging certain breaches on the part of the counterparty, the Agreement came to be terminated vide Termination Notice dated 22.10.2020. Consequently, the Petitioner issued a Notice dated 14.01.2021 under Section 21 of the A&C Act, invoking arbitration and seeking reference of the disputes to an Arbitral Tribunal.

(c). In the interregnum, it is the Petitioner‟s case that Respondent No. 1 failed to release the performance security furnished under the Agreement. The Petitioner was, therefore, constrained to seek interim protection by filing a Petition under Section 9 of the A&C Act. Vide Order dated 27.01.2021, this Court issued notice in the said Petition and directed maintenance of status quo, till the next date of hearing, i.e., 04.03.2021, in respect of the Performance Bank Guarantee furnished by the Petitioner for an amount of Rs. 6,93,85,000/-.

(d). On the next date of hearing, i.e., 04.03.2021, the said Section 9 Petition came to be withdrawn by the Petitioner on instructions.

(e). Thereafter, vide letter dated 03.06.2022, the Society for Affordable Redressal of Disputes, SAROD constituted the learned Arbitral Tribunal and appointed Mr. Justice Vidya Bhushan Gupta (Retd.) as the learned Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

(f). Pursuant thereto, the Petitioner filed its Statement of Claim before the learned Arbitrator on 30.09.2022.

(g). In the meantime, Respondent No. 1 instituted Writ Petition No.

3609/2022 before the Jharkhand High Court, challenging the constitution of the learned Arbitral Tribunal. The said writ petition came to be dismissed as not maintainable vide Order dated 03.01.2023. The Jharkhand High Court, however, observed that such a challenge could appropriately be raised before the learned Arbitral Tribunal by way of an application under Section 16 of the A&C Act.

(h). In light of the aforesaid, Respondent No. 1 filed an application under Section 16 of the A&C Act on 05.01.2023, which came to be dismissed by the learned Arbitral Tribunal vide Order dated

08.08.2023.

(i). Thereafter, Respondent