Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 2]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Smt. Maya Rani Singhal vs Shri. Hardeep Singh on 8 March, 2021

Author: Vibhu Bakhru

Bench: Vibhu Bakhru

                         $~47
                         *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                         +    O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 74/2021
                              SMT. MAYA RANI SINGHAL                        ..... Petitioner
                                             Through: Mr Udyan Srivastava, Advocate

                                                    versus

                                 SHRI. HARDEEP SINGH                         .....Respondent
                                                Through: Mr Deepak Arora, Advocate.
                                 CORAM:
                                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
                                          ORDER

% 08.03.2021

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 29 (A) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter the 'A&C Act'), inter alia, praying that the time for making the arbitration award be extended for a further period of six months.

2. Disputes arose between the parties in respect of the Collaboration Agreement dated 12.11.2011 and by an order dated 16.12.2015, this Court had appointed a former Judge of this Court as the Sole Arbitrator. The learned Arbitrator entered reference on 09.02.2016.

3. The parties, by mutual consent, extended the time for making the award for a period of six months since the parties took some time in leading their evidence and the arbitral proceedings were not concluded within the extended time.

4. In the circumstances, the applicant filed the petition being O.M.P.(MISC.) (COMM) 46/2017, seeking extension of time for a further period of nine months. The said application was allowed by an order dated 16.11.2017 and the time for making the award was extended. The proceedings Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT RAWAL were not completed within the said period as well. Therefore, at the instance of the parties, this Court by an order dated 31.08.2018 passed in OMP (MISC.) (COMM.) 199/2018, extended the time for making the award for a further period of nine months, with effect from 15.08.2018. This was further extended by an order passed by this Court on 09.08.2019 passed in OMP (MISC) (COMM.) 308/2019. The extended time also expired on 15.02.2020. Thereafter, on 12.10.2020, by an order passed by this Court in OMP (MISC) (COMM) 221/2020, the time for making an award was extended yet again. The said time period also came to an end on 15.02.2021.

5. The petitioner submits that the matter is at the stage of final arguments and therefore, further time is required to complete the arbitration proceedings.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent does not oppose the present application and, in fact, joins the petitioner in praying that the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal be extended further.

7. Although arbitral proceedings have been inordinately delayed, however, considering the stage of the arbitral proceedings and the fact that both the parties jointly request for extension of time, this Court considers it apposite to allow the present petition.

8. Accordingly, the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal to make an award is extended for a further period of six months from 15.02.2021, that is, till 14.08.2021.

9. The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J MARCH 8, 2021/MK Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT RAWAL