Gail India Limited vs Taurant Projects Limited

Court
Delhi High Court

$~39 & 40
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
# CNR No. DLHC010177642026
+ O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 354/2026 & I.A. 11638/2026
GAIL INDIA LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Nikhilesh Krishnan, Ms.
Ritika Priya and Mr. Karna
Mehra, Advs.
versus

TAURANT PROJECTS LIMITED .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Raman Gandhi and Ms.
Jyoti Nambiar, Advs.
40
# CNR No. DLHC010489002026
+ O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 109/2026, I.A. 28103/2026 & I.A.
28104/2026

TAURANT PROJECTS LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Raman Gandhi and Ms.
Jyoti Nambiar, Advs.

versus

GAIL (INDIA) LIMITED .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Nikhilesh Krishnan, Ms.
Ritika Priya and Mr. Karna
Mehra, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
ORDER(ORAL)
% 16.10.2026

1. The petition filed by GAIL India Limited being
O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 354/2026 under Sections 29A(4) read with
1
Section 29A(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 , seeks

1
“Act” hereinafter
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:ANUBHAV
TRIPATHI
Signing Date:16.10.2026
17:31:26
O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 354/2026 and O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 109/2026 Page 1 of 4

extension of the mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator for completion
of the arbitral proceedings and rendering of the award.

2. The disputes between the parties arise out of contractual
arrangements concerning the execution of underground pipeline works
in Ranchi.

3. The arbitral proceedings commenced in April 2024 before
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta (Retd.), Former Judge of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, who was appointed as the learned
Sole Arbitrator by this Court.

4. Learned Counsel for GAIL India Limited submits that the
arbitral proceedings have progressed to the stage of recording
evidence and cross-examination. However, the proceedings could not
be completed within the prescribed period and further time is required
for completion of the remaining evidence, hearing final arguments and
rendering the arbitral award. Accordingly, an extension of twelve
months is sought.

5. Per contra , learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Taurant
Projects Limited opposes the extension and submits that the arbitral
proceedings have been affected by procedural irregularities, including
the alleged denial of an effective opportunity to lead evidence and
cross-examination of witnesses, refusal to take additional documents
on record and failure to frame issues.

6. It is further contended that the disputes arising from the
subsequent work arrangements are not covered by the arbitration
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:ANUBHAV
TRIPATHI
Signing Date:16.10.2026
17:31:26
O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 354/2026 and O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 109/2026 Page 2 of 4

clause contained in the original contractual arrangement.

7. On the aforesaid grounds, Taurant Projects Limited has also
instituted a petition being O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 109/2026 under
Sections 14(1)(a) read with Section 14(2) of the Act, seeking
termination of the mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator or, in the
alternative, substitution of the arbitrator.

8. This Court has considered the rival submissions and perused the
material placed on record.

9. Having regard to the stage of the arbitral proceedings, the
nature of the disputes and the requirement of bringing the arbitration
to its logical conclusion, this Court is satisfied that sufficient cause has
been made out for extension of the mandate of the learned Sole
Arbitrator.

10. The allegations raised by Taurant Projects Ltd, by themselves,
do not warrant termination of the mandate of the learned Sole
Arbitrator in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

11. Any procedural objections that remain open may be raised
before the learned Arbitral Tribunal in accordance with law. The
objections concerning the existence, scope and applicability of the
arbitration agreement shall remain open for consideration by the
arbitrator without prejudice to the rights and contentions of either
party.

12. In view of the foregoing, the petition filed by GAIL India
Limited, i.e. O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 354/2026 under Section 29A
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:ANUBHAV
TRIPATHI
Signing Date:16.10.2026
17:31:26
O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 354/2026 and O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 109/2026 Page 3 of 4

of the Act is allowed. The mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator,
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta (Retd.) is extended by a period of
twelve months for completion of the arbitral proceedings and
rendering of the award.

13. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the petition filed
under Section 14. Hence, the petition filed by Taurant Projects
Limited, i.e., O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 109/2026 seeking termination of
the mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator is disposed of, with the
direction to the parties to raise all disputes, objections, and other pleas
available to them in accordance with law before the learned Sole
Arbitrator.

14. It is clarified that the observations made herein are confined to
the disposal of the present petitions and shall not prejudice the
adjudication of the merits of the dispute.

15. The parties shall extend full cooperation to the learned Sole
Arbitrator to ensure expeditious completion of the proceedings within
the extended period.

16. Both petitions stand disposed of in the above terms. Pending
application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.


OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J
OCTOBER 16, 2026/ gunn




Signature Not Verified
Signed By:ANUBHAV
TRIPATHI
Signing Date:16.10.2026
17:31:26
O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 354/2026 and O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 109/2026 Page 4 of 4