Dawa Sharpa vs Executive Engineer

 Sandeep Sharma, J

By way of instant application filed under Section 29ÂA (4&5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ( as amended), prayer has been made

on behalf of the petitioner for extension of time, enabling the learned Arbitrator to conclude the arbitration proceedings.

Learned Additional Advocate General while waiving notice on behalf of the respondent fairly states that in view of the prayer made in the

application, he does not intend to file any reply to the application and shall have no objection in case the prayer for enlargement of time is

considered/granted by this Court in view of the provisions contained under Section 29Â​A of the Act.

It is not in dispute that pursuant to some dispute inter se petitioner and the respondent, matter came to be referred to the arbitration of Sh. Sanjay

Kumar Attri, Superintending Engineer, Arbitration Circle, HPPWD, Solan. Arbitrator as named above with the consent of the parties entered into a

reference on 7.4.2018, but fact remains that final award could not be passed by the aforesaid arbitrator within a period of one year in terms of the

provisions contained under Section 29ÂA (1) of the Act and as such, parties with their mutual consent got the period extended for further six months

in terms of the provisions contained under Section 29ÂA (3) of the Act. However, it appears that despite there being aforesaid extension of time,

learned arbitrator has been not able to pass the award during the extended period on account of non submission of CD and documents by the parties

to the arbitration.

Careful perusal of Section 29ÂA (1) of the Act reveals that the award in matters other than international commercial arbitration shall be made by

the arbitral tribunal within a period of twelve months from the date of completion of pleadings under sub section (4) of section 23. Perusal of sub

section (2) of Section 29 (3) further reveals that if in case learned arbitrator is unable to pass award within twelve months in terms of Section 29Â‐

A(1), parties to the lis by consent may get the period extended, enabling arbitrator to pass award within extended period.

Though, perusal of sub section 4 of Section 29ÂA reveals that if the award is not made within the period specified in sub section (1) or the

extended period specified under sub section (3), the mandate of the arbitrator(s) shall terminate, but if prior to expiry of the extended period, either of

the parties approaches the Court for extension of time, Court may consider the prayer for enlargement of time.

Having carefully perused the explanation rendered on record by the petitioner qua delay in completion of arbitration proceedings, this Court deems it

fit to grant further six months time to learned arbitrator to pass the final award, whereafter no further time would be granted.

Consequently, in view of the above, the present application is allowed and further six months time is granted to learned arbitrator to pass final award

in case No.5/18.

Learned counsel representing the parties undertake to apprise the learned arbitrator with regard to passing of the instant order, enabling him to do

the needful well within the stipulated period. Needless to say, period of six months as granted by this Court shall commence from the date of

production of certified copy of the instant order.