Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J
R.Vedagiri – Appellant
Versus
K.Rajakumari – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for extension of arbitration time. (Para 1) |
| 2. objections regarding extension of arbitration time. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. observations on the maintainability of extension applications. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. final decision on extending arbitration time. (Para 7) |
O R D E R
This application has been filed under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 , seeking for extension of time to complete the arbitration proceedings.
2. Heard both sides.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents relied upon the counter affidavit filed by the respondents and submitted that the learned Arbitrator was appointed by this Court by an order dated 05.04.2022. Thereafter, the applicant has been filing repeated interlocutory applications and in spite of extension of time that was granted during earlier occasions, the applicant is not co-operating for the completion of the arbitration proceedings.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that during earlier occasions, the respondents have given consent for the extension of time with the fond expectation that the proceedings will be completed within the extended time and also consented for extension of time by the
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
