Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Bdr Builders And Developers Private ... vs Shri Mukesh Kumar Gupta (Since ... on 16 September, 2022

Author: Neena Bansal Krishna

Bench: Neena Bansal Krishna

                          $~16
                          *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +      OMP (MISC.)(COMM.) 128/2022, I.A.13043/2022
                                 BDR BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED
                                                                                        ..... Petitioner
                                                    Through:     Mr. Akhil Sachar and Mr. Sangram
                                                                 Singh, Advocates.

                                                    versus

                                 SHRI MUKESH KUMAR GUPTA (SINCE DECEASED)
                                 THROUGH HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES AND OTHERS
                                                                                     ..... Respondents
                                                    Through:     Mr. Aman Tehlan, Advocate for
                                                                 Respondent No.3, 6 & 7.


                                 CORAM:
                                 HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
                                                  ORDER

% 16.09.2022

1. A petition under Section 29A (4) and (5) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed for extension of mandate of the learned Arbitrator.

2. It is submitted that the Sole Arbitrator entered into reference on 03th May, 2018 for adjudication of disputes arising out of Agreement to Sell dated 19th July, 2014 which contains the Arbitration Clause. The stipulated period of 18 months was supposed to expire on 02nd November, 2019. OMP (Misc) Comm No. 394 of 2019 under Section 29A (4) & (5) of the Act was filed which was allowed vide Order dated 01st October, 2019 and the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SAHIL SHARMA Signing Date:07.10.2022 16:08:34 period for conclusion of the arbitration proceedings was extended by six months for a period up to 02nd May, 2020. Thereafter, another OMP Miscellaneous (Comm) No. 125 of 2021 under Section 29A(4) and (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was filed which was disposed of vide Order dated 06th August, 2021, wherein it was observed that in view of the Order in Suo Moto Writ (Civil) No. 03/2020 titled in Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, the period i.e. 15th March, 2020 till 14th March, 2021 excluded for computing the period under 29A. It was observed that the mandate of the learned Arbitrator was surviving and the petition was filed ex ante. Thereafter, OMP (T) Comm No. 96 of 2021 under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was filed in view of the consensus between the parties. The petition was allowed vide Order dated 11th November, 2021 and learned Arbitrator was substituted who took over the arbitration proceedings. The petitioner has submitted that since the new Arbitral Tribunal has entered into reference vide Order dated 11 th November, 2021 the mandate was still existing. However, in view of the objections taken, the present petition has been filed for extension of the mandate of the learned Arbitrator for another six months w.e.f 21 st May, 2022.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent has neither filed any formal reply nor raised any objection.

4. Considering the submissions made in the application, since the period of three months has already gone by from 21 st May, 2022, the mandate of the Sole Arbitrator is extended for another nine months from 21st May, 2022.

5. The petition is accordingly disposed of.

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J SEPTEMBER 16, 2022 va Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SAHIL SHARMA Signing Date:07.10.2022 16:08:34