This order allowed the petitioner's petition under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to extend the Arbitral Tribunal's mandate for six months with the consent of both parties.
Petition allowed; Arbitral Tribunal's mandate extended for six months from 05.02.2024.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~33
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
M/S B. M. CONSTRUCTION CO. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Himanshu Upadhyay, Advocate. versus
UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Pratima N. Lakra, CGSC with Mr. R.K. Uppal, AXEN, Construction-II, Shivaji Bridge, New Delhi.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN O R D E R
% 25.01.2024
Page 1 of 2
O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 57/2024
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/06/2024 at 11:31:10
PRATEEK JALAN, J
JANUARY 25, 2024
“Bhupi”/
Page 2 of 2
O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 57/2024
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/06/2024 at 11:31:10
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal may be extended pursuant to Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/S B. M. CONSTRUCTION CO.
UNION OF INDIA
PRATEEK JALAN
As recorded by the court registry
A miscellaneous application in an arbitration matter, commonly seeking extension of the arbitral tribunal's mandate under Section 29A.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
