Delhi High Court

Court May Extend Arbitral Mandate Under Section 29A Based on Consensus and Sufficient Cause

Ahluwalia Contracts (India) Ltd vs Delhi Agricultural Marketing Board

Delhi High CourtJUDGMENT: May 29, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The Petitioner and Respondent entered into a Letter of Commencement on September 13, 2019

Source reference: p. 2, para. 2

Following disputes, a Sole Arbitrator was appointed by the High Court of Delhi on January 17, 2023

Source reference: p. 1, para. 1

Pleadings were completed on July 25, 2024, and evidence was subsequently led

Source reference: p. 2, para. 3

The mandate was previously extended once until October 31, 2025

Source reference: p. 2, para. 5

The Petitioner sought a further extension as the proceedings reached the stage of final arguments but exceeded the statutory timeline

Source reference: p. 2, para. 6

The Respondent expressed no objection to the extension

Source reference: p. 2, para. 7
02

Issues

1. Whether the mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator should be extended under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to conclude final arguments and render an award

Source reference: p. 2, para. 6
03

Law Applied

The Court applied Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which mandates that an award must be made within twelve months of the completion of pleadings, allowing for a six-month extension by party consent and further extensions by the Court upon showing "sufficient cause"

Source reference: p. 3, para. 10

It further relied on the precedent set by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rohan Builders (India) Private Limited v. Berger Paints India Limited (2024), which clarified the scope, ambit, and mandatory nature of Section 29-A regarding the termination and extension of an arbitrator's mandate

Source reference: p. 4, para. 11
04

Reasoning

The Court observed that the arbitral proceedings are currently at the advanced stage of final arguments

Source reference: p. 2, para. 3

It determined that extending the mandate was in the "interest of justice" to ensure "continuity and consistency" in the adjudication of the dispute

Source reference: p. 2, para. 9

The Court noted that since both parties were ad idem (in agreement) regarding the necessity of the extension, there was no legal impediment to granting the relief

Source reference: p. 2, para. 9

By applying the "sufficient cause" standard under Section 29A(5), the Court found that the procedural progress (reaching final arguments) justified a further period to prevent the frustration of the effort already invested in the arbitration

Source reference: p. 4, para. 12-13
05

Holding

The Court answered the issue in the affirmative, allowing the petition.

The Court extended the mandate of the Sole Arbitrator for a period of twelve months, effective until May 31, 2027, and regularized the period between the expiry of the previous mandate and the date of the current order.

Source reference: p. 4, para. 13

All pending applications were disposed of accordingly

Source reference: p. 4, para. 14
Delhi High Court

Original Court PDF

Ahluwalia Contracts (India) LtdvsDelhi Agricultural Marketing Board

Delhi High Court · May 29, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment