Facts
The Petitioner and Respondent entered into a Letter of Commencement on September 13, 2019
Source reference: p. 2, para. 2Following disputes, a Sole Arbitrator was appointed by the High Court of Delhi on January 17, 2023
Source reference: p. 1, para. 1Pleadings were completed on July 25, 2024, and evidence was subsequently led
Source reference: p. 2, para. 3The mandate was previously extended once until October 31, 2025
Source reference: p. 2, para. 5The Petitioner sought a further extension as the proceedings reached the stage of final arguments but exceeded the statutory timeline
Source reference: p. 2, para. 6The Respondent expressed no objection to the extension
Source reference: p. 2, para. 7Issues
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. 6Law 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. 10It 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. 11Reasoning
The Court observed that the arbitral proceedings are currently at the advanced stage of final arguments
Source reference: p. 2, para. 3It 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. 9The 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. 9By 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. 12-13Holding
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. 13All pending applications were disposed of accordingly
Source reference: p. 4, para. 14Original Court PDF
Ahluwalia Contracts (India) LtdvsDelhi Agricultural Marketing Board
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in