AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Vide order dated 18th August, 2017 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Arbitration Application No.16/2017, Hon’ble Shri
Justice G.S. Singhvi, Former Judge, Supreme Court of India was appointed as sole Arbitrator to resolve the disputes and differences in respect of the
agreements between the parties.
The instant application has been filed by the applicant under Section 29A (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter ‘the Act of
1996’) for extension of time for passing the award by the Arbitrator.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that after having received the copy of the Court’s order dated 18.8.2017, learned Arbitrator issued notices to
both the parties for their appearance before him. The applicant appeared before the Arbitrator and filed its statement of claim. The non applicants also
put in appearance before the Arbitrator. Proceedings thereon commenced on 5.12.2017. However the award not having been passed within 12
months from the date on which the Arbitrator entered onto reference i.e. on 5.12.2017, the parties jointly requested for extension of time to passing
the award. That was extended by Arbitrator for a period of six months in terms of Section 29A (3) of the Act of 1996 as reflected in his order dated
27.9.2018. Since then admittedly arguments in the proceedings were concluded on 5.12.2017 when the arbitrator vide order dated 5.2.2019 required
the parties to file their written submissions within two weeks. Then vide email dated 26.4.2019 addressed to both the parties, the arbitrator noting the
time for passing of the award in the matter before him, was to expire on 6.1.2019 also observed that as the preparation of award was likely to take
another 8 weeks they should jointly seek extension of time by the Court under Section 29A (4) of the Act of 1996. It is in the aforesaid facts and
circumstances that this application has been accordingly moved.
Reply to the application has been filed repeating the factual aspects of the matter. Its perusal does not indicate that the application for extension of
time is being seriously opposed and in fact the averments made in the last paragraph thereof state that “reply of the misc. application filed by the
respondents may kindly be taken on record and the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pass the appropriate order in the light of facts and
circumstances, mentioned herein aboveâ€.
Heard. Considered.
Admittedly the final arguments in the arbitration proceedings have been concluded on 5.2.2019. It appears that subsequent to filing of the written
submissions by the parties, the arbitrator for reasons unstated but apparently of other professional and personal pre- occupations was unable to pass
the award within the extended time. In the circumstances, this Court must necessarily exercised its power under Section 29A (4) of the Act of 1996
lest the arbitral proceedings nearing completion and requiring only passing of the award are rendered wasted.
Consequently, I deem it just and proper to extend the time for passing the award for eight weeks from submission of a certified copy of this order to
the learned Sole Arbitrator. The application under Section 29A of the Act of 1996 is accordingly allowed.
A copy of this order be communicated forthwith to the learned Arbitrator for his information.