Delhi High Court - Orders
M/S. Crayons Advertising Private ... vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 10 November, 2021
Author: Vibhu Bakhru
Bench: Vibhu Bakhru
$~10
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 140/2021
M/S. CRAYONS ADVERTISING PRIVATE
LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr Jaiveer Kant and Ms Deepti
Babel, Advocates.
versus
BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED ..... Respondent
Through: Mr L.B. Rai, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
ORDER
% 10.11.2021 [Hearing Held Through Videoconferencing]
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter the 'A&C Act) praying that time for the Arbitral Tribunal to make an award be extended for a further period of nine months.
2. Disputes have arisen between the parties in connection with the an agreement dated 17.09.2009 (the Agreement), which were referred to arbitration. The Sole Arbitrator was appointed on 03.02.2014. He accepted his appointment on 25.03.2014. However, he could not complete the arbitration and on 10.11.2016 communicated his inability to continue with the arbitral proceedings.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT RAWAL3. The petitioner, thereafter, approached the respondent for appointment of an arbitrator. However, the respondent failed to take any steps for appointment of an arbitrator. Consequently, on 29.11.2016, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 15 of the A&C Act [OMP(T)(COMM) 82/2016] for appointment of an arbitrator. Thereafter, on 30.11.2016, the respondent appointed another arbitrator (the Second Arbitrator) to fill the vacancy caused by the first arbitrator withdrawing from the proceedings.
4. The petition filed by the petitioner under Section 15 of the A&C Act was disposed of on 06.12.2016. The time limit for making an award expired and the mandate of the Second Arbitrator appointed by the respondent stood terminated. In the circumstances, the petitioner filed another petition under Section 14 and 15 of the A&C Act [OMP(T)(COMM) 71/2017] which was disposed of by this Court on 19.01.2018 by appointing a Retired District Judge (the Third Arbitrator) as the Sole Arbitrator. The learned Arbitrator entered reference on 18.02.2018.
5. The time limit for the learned Arbitrator (Third Arbitrator) to make the award expired on 18.02.2019. Thereafter, both the parties mutually agreed to extend the time for making the award for a further period of six months, which expired on 08.08.2019.
6. The arbitral proceedings were not completed within the extended period. Consequently, the petitioner thereafter moved an application under Section 29A of the A&C Act [OMP(Misc.)(COMM.) 320/2019], which was disposed of by this Court by an order dated 27.08.2019 and the time for making the arbitral award was extended for a further period of six months Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT RAWAL from 27.08.2019. In addition, the period between 18.08.2019 to 27.08.2019 was regularised.
7. The extended period expired on 27.02.2020. The petitioner once again moved an application under Section 29A of the A&C Act seeking further extension of time for the Arbitral Tribunal to make an award [OMP(Misc.)(COMM.)121/2020]. The said petition was allowed by an order dated 05.11.2020 and the time for making an award was extended for a period of twelve months from 27.02.2020. The said time was extended yet again by a further period of six months by an order dated 04.03.2021 passed in the application filed by the petitioner under Section 29A of the A&C Act [OMP(Misc.)(COMM.) 70/2021]. The said period also expired on 28.08.2021.
8. It is seen that the time for making the award has been extended on multiple occasions. However, the Arbitral Tribunal has been unable to conclude the arbitral proceedings. Notwithstanding the above, the learned counsel for the parties state that the delay is not on account of the Arbitral Tribunal not proceedings expeditiously, but on account of various reasons including the disruption caused by the pandemic.
9. The learned counsel for both the parties request that the time for making the award be further extended for a period of nine months as the proceedings are still at the stage of examination of witnesses.
10. In view of the consensus between the parties, the present petition is allowed and the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal to make the award is extended for a further period of nine months from date. Further, the period Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT RAWAL from 28.08.2021 till date, is also regularised.
11. The Arbitral Tribunal is requested to complete the arbitral proceedings within the aforesaid period.
12. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J NOVEMBER 10, 2021 RK Click here to check corrigendum, if any Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT RAWAL