Delhi High Court - Orders
Tata Aldesa Jv vs Dedicated Freight Corridor ... on 1 April, 2026
$~26 to 28 & 32 to 34
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 68/2026 & EX.APPL.(OS) 454/2026
(Ex. From filing certified copies of the documents)
TATA ALDESA JV .....Decree Holder
Through: Mr. Gaurav Pachnanda, Senior
Advocate with Ms. Amita
Katragadda, Ms. Nayani
Agarwal, Ms. Shreya Bansal,
Mr. Rohit Rahar and Mr.
Vinesh Choudhary, Advocates.
versus
DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION OF
INDIA LTD .....Judgement Debtor
Through: Mr. Manish Kumar Bishnoi,
Mr. Anish Chawla, Ms.
Suhasini and Mr. Khubaib
Shakeel, Advocates.
27
OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 69/2026 & EX.APPL.(OS) 455/2026
(Ex. From filing certified copies of the documents)
TATA ALDESA JV .....Decree Holder
Through: Mr. Gaurav Pachnanda, Senior
Advocate with Ms. Amita
Katragadda, Ms. Nayani
Agarwal, Ms. Shreya Bansal,
Mr. Rohit Rahar and Mr.
Vinesh Choudhary, Advocates.
versus
DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION OF
INDIA LTD .....Judgement Debtor
Through: Mr. Manish Kumar Bishnoi,
Mr. Anish Chawla, Ms.
Suhasini and Mr. Khubaib
Shakeel, Advocates.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/04/2026 at 20:53:10
28
+ OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 70/2026 & EX.APPL.(OS) 456/2026
(Ex. From filing certified copies of the documents)
TATA ALDESA JV .....Decree Holder
Through: Mr. Gaurav Pachnanda, Senior
Advocate with Ms. Amita
Katragadda, Ms. Nayani
Agarwal, Ms. Shreya Bansal,
Mr. Rohit Rahar and Mr.
Vinesh Choudhary, Advocates.
versus
DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION OF
INDIA LTD .....Judgement Debtor
Through: Mr. Manish Kumar Bishnoi,
Mr. Anish Chawla, Ms.
Suhasini and Mr. Khubaib
Shakeel, Advocates.
32
O.M.P. (COMM) 180/2025, I.A. 11956/2025 (Stay), I.A.
11958/2025 (Delay in filing the petition) & I.A. 11959/2025
(Delay of 23 days in Re-filing the petition)
DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION OF
INDIA LTD .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Manish Kumar Bishnoi,
Mr. Anish Chawla, Ms.
Suhasini and Mr. Khubaib
Shakeel, Advocates.
versus
TATA ALDESA JV .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Abhishek Gupta, CGSC
along with Mr. Kumar
Kartikeya, Mr. Dhananjay
Singh & Mr. Shaswat Kumar
Pandet, Advocates.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/04/2026 at 20:53:10
33
O.M.P. (COMM) 182/2025, I.A. 11984/2025 (Stay), I.A.
11986/2025 (Delay in filing the petition) & I.A. 11987/2025
(Delay of 29 days in Re-filing the petition)
DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION OF
INDIA LTD .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Manish Kumar Bishnoi,
Mr. Anish Chawla, Ms.
Suhasini and Mr. Khubaib
Shakeel, Advocates.
versus
TATA ALDESA JV .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Abhishek Gupta, CGSC
along with Mr. Kumar
Kartikeya, Mr. Dhananjay
Singh & Mr. Shaswat Kumar
Pandet, Advocates.
34
O.M.P. (COMM) 183/2025 & I.A. 12010/2025 (Stay), I.A.
12012/2025 (Delay in filing the petition) & I.A. 12013/2025
(Delay of 29 days in Re-filing the petition)
DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION OF
INDIA LTD .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Manish Kumar Bishnoi,
Mr. Anish Chawla, Ms.
Suhasini and Mr. Khubaib
Shakeel, Advocates.
versus
TATA ALDESA JV .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Abhishek Gupta, CGSC
along with Mr. Kumar
Kartikeya, Mr. Dhananjay
Singh & Mr. Shaswat Kumar
Pandet, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN
SHANKAR
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/04/2026 at 20:53:10
ORDER
% 01.04.2026 IA No. 11959/2025 in OMP (COMM) 180/2025, IA No. 11987/2025 in OMP (COMM) 182/2025, and IA No. 12013/2025 in OMP (COMM) 183/2025
1. The present Applications, filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, seek condonation of delay in re-filing of the above-mentioned Petitions.
2. The delay sought to be condoned in re-filing is of 23 days in OMP (COMM) 180/2025, 29 days in OMP (COMM) 182/2025, and 29 days in OMP (COMM) 183/2025.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent raises a preliminary objection to the present Applications, placing reliance upon the judgment of this Court in in Delhi Development Authority vs. M/s Durga Construction Co. [2013 SCC Online Del 4451] and in particular paragraph nos. 20, 21 and 25, to contend that in the absence of any proper justification given in the application seeking the condonation of delay in re-filing, the relief cannot be granted. He further refers to the contents of the application for condonation of delay in re-filing, in particular, para 4 of IA No. 11959/2025 in OMP (COMM) 180/2025, and submits that the averments therein are identical in the connected applications, save and except the period of delay, which reads as under:
"4. That there is delay of 23 days in refiling the present Petition. The delay in refiling the present Petition is bona fide in nature. The Authorised Signatory of the Petitioner, Shri M.K. Jain was faced with two unfortunate bereavements in his family. That Shri M.K. Jain's mother unfortunately passed away on 24.02.2025 and his father unfortunately passed away on 06.04.2025. Due to these unfortunate developments, Shri M.K. Jain was rendered This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/04/2026 at 20:53:10 unavailable due to which there were delays in refiling the said petition."
4. It is further submitted that there exists a considerable gap between the two events relied upon by the Petitioner and the period of delay in re-filing. Additionally, it is submitted that Mr. M.K. Jain was not the sole authorised signatory, and another authorised representative, namely Mr. Deepak Kumar Sharma, had also executed affidavits on behalf of the Petitioner. It is thus argued that the explanation furnished is neither satisfactory nor sufficient.
5. He also seeks to rely upon the judgment of the Division Bench in Union of India Vs. M/s Distribution Logistics Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., [2024 SCC Online Del 10122], particularly paragraph nos. 11, 14, 15, 16 and 17 thereof.
6. He therefore submits that, in fact, any re-filing post the period seven (07) days would have to be treated as a fresh filing and in the present case, since there is a delay of over 28 days beyond the 30 days condonable period. The present Petitions are clearly barred by the limitation.
7. Per Contra, Mr. P. Chidambram, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant/Petitioner, submits that the delay pertains only to re-filing and not to the initial filing of the Petitions. He submits that the explanation set out in para 4, which has been extracted hereinabove, clearly evidences that there were bona fide circumstances, particularly the successive bereavements suffered by Mr. M.K. Jain, who was the authorised and conversant person handling the matter.
8. He further submits that Mr. Deepak Kumar Sharma, who had filed certain affidavits, was not fully conversant with the matter. And This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/04/2026 at 20:53:10 that, in any event, even if it is assumed that there was some delay between the filing of the affidavits by Mr. Sharma and Mr. M.K. Jain, the same was only of about 1-3 days, which is insignificant.
9. He further submits that in any event, the main issues pertain to the second and third re-filing, and for the same, he relies upon a chart prepared in OMP (COMM) 180/2025, which is handed over across the bar and which is extracted as follows:-
DFCCIL. v. TATA Aldesa (JV) OMP (Comm) 180/2025 FILING DETAILS Interim Award- 01.11.2023 (Not Challenged) Final Award- 10.12.2024 (Received on 11.12.2024) Total delay in re-filing - 22 days, occasioned due to the bereavement of AR's both parents Dates Event
10.03.2025 Petition filed on 89th day of the receipt of the award.
Filing comprised of - Award, proper pleadings, affidavits, vakalatnama, documents, etc. 11.03.2025 Defects raised by the Registry.
Defects- Copy of Award be made first document, Proof of Service to be attached, Condonation of delay in filing application be filed.
18.03.2025 1st Re-filing (no delay) 19.03.2025 Defects raised by the Registry.
Defects- Insert averment before prayer regarding commercial dispute, Caveat report be obtained, service, application for condonation of delay in filing/re-filing be filed, undertaking for OCR be given.
10.04.2025 2nd Re-filing (delay of 15 days due to bereavement of AR's parents, followed by This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/04/2026 at 20:53:10 rituals and prayers) 15.04.2025 Defects raised by the Registry.
Defects- Proof of service be attached.
Condonation of delay application be filed. 29.04.2025 3rd Re-filing (delay of 7 days due to bereavement of AR's parents, followed in rituals and prayers) 29.04.2025 Defects raised by the Registry.
Defects-Proof of service be attached.
Condonation of delay application be filed. 05.05.2025 4th Refiling, along with condonation of delay application per the Registry's insistence, even though there was no delay in filing the petition. (no delay) 06.05.2025 Defects raised by the Registry.
Defects- In compliance of Hon'ble Court's order dated 30.04.2025 in Arb.P. 621/2025. However, in case of urgency in listing of the matter, the party may file an application to seek exemption from filing typed/legible copies of the dim/illegible documents. In that event, the application will contain the details of the pages which are dim/illegible, accompanied with an undertaking to file typed/legible copies within two weeks from the date of listing of the matter before the court under objections.
06.05.2025 5th Refiling (no delay) 06.05.2025 Defects marked by the Registry.
Defects- Prayer for condonation of delay application does not tally with title of application.
07.05.2025 6th Re-filing (no delay) 07.05.2025 Defects marked by the registry Defects-Caveator be served and proof of This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/04/2026 at 20:53:10 service be attached.
08.05.2025 7th and final re-filing (no delay) 13.05.2025 Petition listed before the Hon'ble Court.
10. It is contended that the substantial portion of the delay occurred during the second and third re-filing stages, which coincided with the period of bereavement in the family of the authorised signatory.
11. He also submits that in the Hindu Tradition, certain ceremonies and obligations follow such bereavements, which reasonably account for the delay. And in furtherance of the same, the reliance is placed upon judgments of this Court in Madhyam Agrivet Industries Ltd. Vs. Snup Fresh Milk and Diary Products Pvt. Ltd. [FAO(OS) (COMM) 9/2023] as well as the decision of the learned Co-ordinate Bench in Viceroy Engineering V. Smiths Detection Veecon System Pvt. Ltd. [2023 SCC Online Del 7654], particularly paragraph no. 18 thereof, and in Pragati Construction Consultants Vs. Union of India, 2025 [SCC Online Del 636], particularly paragraph no. 47 thereof.
12. He also submits that even in the judgment of DDA Vs. Durga Construction Co., [2013 SCC OnLine Del 4451], it has been held that, in matters relating to the condonation of delay in re-filing, a liberal approach needs to be taken. He further submits that the delay in the present case is neither deliberate nor attributable to negligence, but is occasioned by unavoidable circumstances. It is thus submitted that the present case is one which is fit for the condonation of delay, given the genuine circumstances in which the delay came to be occasioned.
13. This Court has heard learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and is of the view that in the present case, while there is indeed a certain amount of delay in re-filing, however, the same is not so inordinate or so egregious that it cannot be condoned.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/04/2026 at 20:53:10
14. As is apparent, the delay appears to have been occasioned due to the sudden bereavement in the family of the competent person to file the present Petition, as well as to sign various affidavits in support of various applications.
15. The material on record indicates that the delay does not seem to have been occasioned due to either negligence or due to any such factum which could be said to be so egregious as to warrant that the delay ought not to be condoned.
16. This Court is also of the view that various judgments have been pronounced by the learned Division Bench as well as the learned Co-ordinate Benches, which have consistently held that there needs to be a liberal approach taken to the condonation of delay in cases of re- filing as opposed to condonation of delay in the case of filing a Petition under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
17. The parties need to bear in mind that the timelines, as it is, are extremely strict; and therefore, the Courts have repeatedly cautioned against exercising too strict a construction or too strict an approach when it comes to condonation of delay in re-filing.
18. This Court is also of the view that the judgments of the learned Co-ordinate Bench and the learned Division Bench in Viceroy Engineering (supra) and Durga Constructions (supra), respectively, also lead us to conclude that the delay in re-filing needs to be condoned in the present case, and the objection as respects the alleged delay in re-filing is therefore rejected.
19. In view thereof, the present Applications are allowed, the delay in re-filing the present Petitions stands condoned.
20. The Applications are disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/04/2026 at 20:53:10 IA No. 11958/2025 in OMP (COMM) 180/2025, IA No. 11986/2025 in OMP (COMM) 182/2025 and IA No. 12012/2025 in OMP (COMM) 183/2025
21. The present Applications have been filed, seeking condonation of delay in filing. This Court notes that the petitions have been filed within the condonable period, i.e. within the three months and thirty days period as prescribed under the Section 34 (3) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
22. This Court is of the view that the present Petitions, having been filed within the condonable period as prescribed, the delay in filing stands condoned.
23. The Applications seeking condonation of delay in filing are disposed of.
OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 68/2026 & EX.APPL.(OS) 454/2026 (Ex. From filing certified copies of the documents) OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 69/2026 & EX.APPL.(OS) 455/2026 (Ex. From filing certified copies of the documents) OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 70/2026 & EX.APPL.(OS) 456/2026 (Ex. From filing certified copies of the documents) O.M.P. (COMM) 180/2025, O.M.P. (COMM) 182/2025 and O.M.P. (COMM) 183/2025
24. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents in O.M.P. (COMM) 180/2025, O.M.P. (COMM) 182/2025 and O.M.P. (COMM) 183/2025 seeks and is granted a period of six (06) weeks to file a reply to the present Petitions.
25. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within a period of two (02) weeks thereafter.
26. Further, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner in O.M.P. (COMM) 180/2025, O.M.P. (COMM) 182/2025 and O.M.P. (COMM) 183/2025, on instructions, submits that they will This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/04/2026 at 20:53:10 be depositing the entire awarded sum with up-to-date interest till today within a period of eight (08) weeks from today.
27. List on 15.07.2026.
28. A photocopy of the Order passed today be kept in the connected matters.
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.
APRIL 01, 2026/da/va/jk This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/04/2026 at 20:53:10