Disposed¶20

Goverdhan Transport Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Government of NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC12 Mar 2025O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.)/228/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 29A(4) & (5) Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996; extension of mandate of Arbitral Tribunal after expiry of twelve-month/extended six-month period; regularisation of lapsed arbitrator mandate; Rohan Builders (India) Private Limited v. Berger Paints India Limited, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2494; Goverdhan Transport Co Pvt Ltd v. Government of NCT of Delhi; Justice Kailash Gambhir (Retd.), Sole Arbitrator; O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 228/2025; Delhi High Court; mandate extended till 30.11.2025; final hearing stage; respondent no objection.

What did the court decide?

Mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal (Sole Arbitrator, Mr. Justice Kailash Gambhir (Retd.)) regularised till the date of the order and extended till 30.11.2025 for pronouncement of the award; petition disposed of along with pending applications, if any. ¶20

Goverdhan Transport Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the mandate of the Sole Arbitrator, whose previously extended term had run until 14.02.2025, could be further extended under Section 29A(4) & (5) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 so as to enable pronouncement of the arbitral award.

¶13

Court's answer

On the stated ground that the arbitration was at an advanced stage, the Court regularised the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal till the date of the order and extended it till 30.11.2025 so that the award could be pronounced.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Implicitly, by granting and regularising the mandate although the earlier extended term had lapsed on 14.02.2025 (the order being dated 12.03.2025), the Court treated the Section 29A(4)/(5) application made after expiry of the applicable period as maintainable, consistent with the Apex Court ruling in Rohan Builders which it placed on record.

¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Subramonium Prasad, J., 12.03.2025), O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 228/2025 - Goverdhan Transport Co Pvt Ltd petitioned under Section 29A(4) & (5) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 for extension of the mandate of the Sole Arbitrator, Mr. Justice Kailash Gambhir (Retd.), appointed by order dated 30.05.2017 in O.M.P.(T.)(COMM.) 46/2017 and last extended till 14.02.2025 by order dated 14.02.2024 in O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 102 of 2024. Proceedings were at the final-hearing stage; the Government of NCT of Delhi raised no objection. Recording the Supreme Court's ruling in Rohan Builders (India) Pvt Ltd v. Berger Paints India Ltd, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2494, that Section 29A(4) read with 29A(5) applications remain maintainable even after expiry of the twelve-month or extended six-month period, the Court regularised the mandate till the date of the order and extended it till 30.11.2025; the petition was disposed of along with pending applications, if any.

¶1

$~34

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 228/2025

¶4

GOVERDHAN TRANSPORT CO PVT LTD .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Aditya Garg, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr Sameer Vashisht with Ms Harshita Nathrani Advocates

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

¶9

O R D E R % 12.03.2025

¶10

I.A. 6636/2025 (Exemption)

¶11

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 228/2025

¶13

This is a petition under Section 29A (4) & (5) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking extension of mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal for making the arbitral award.

¶14

Material on record discloses that this Court vide Order dated 30.05.2017 in O.M.P. (T.) (COMM.) 46/2017 appointed Mr. Justice Kailash Gambhir (Retd.), as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate on the disputes between the parties. The mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal is being extended from time to time. The last such extension was granted by this Court vide Order dated 14.02.2024 in O.M.P. (MISC.) (COMM.) 102 of 2024 by which the mandate of the learned Arbitrator was extended till 14.02.2025. It is

¶15

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 01/04/2025 at 14:38:11

¶16

stated that the proceedings are at the stage of final hearing. The Petitioner has, therefore, approached this Court seeking extension of the mandate of the Arbitrator.

¶17

Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent on advance notice states that the Respondent does not have any objection to the present Petition.

¶18

The Apex Court in Rohan Builders (India) Private Limited v. Berger Paints India Limited, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2494, has held that an application for extension of the time period for passing an arbitral award under Section 29A(4) read with Section 29A(5) is maintainable even after the expiry of the twelve-month or the extended six-month period, as the case may be.

¶19

In view of the fact that the matter is at an advance stage, this Court is inclined to regularize the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal till today and the mandate is extended till 30.11.2025 so that the Award can be pronounced.

¶20

The Petition is disposed of along with the pending applications, if

¶21

any.

¶22

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J

¶23

MARCH 12, 2025 Rahul

¶24

This is a digitally signed order.

¶25

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 01/04/2025 at 14:38:11

Goverdhan Transport Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Government of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Goverdhan Transport Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Government of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kmb-Era Jv Vs Airport Authority of India

Living Consumer Products Private Limited Vs Play Games 24X7 Private Limited

Navjit Singh Sandhu (Huf) Vs Splendor Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Kmb-Era (Jv) Vs Airport Authority of India

M/S Ashoka Enterprises Vs Union of India

Gsba Builders (P) Ltd. Vs Mallani Infotech (P) Ltd.

H Ank K Solutions Vs Shiv Nadar Foundation

Sumant Kumar Sood & Ors. Vs Satish Kumar Sood & Ors.

M/S Livguard Energy Technologies Private Limited Vs M/S Shiv Shakti Agencies through Its Proprietor Mr. Vishal Kumar Goyal

Aananayaa Foundation Vs Innovative Project Management Services Private Limited & Ors.

M/S Livguard Energy Technologies Private Limited Vs M/S Shiv Shakti Agencies through Its Proprietor Mr. Vishal Kumar Goyal

Jaibir Singh Vs Delhi Development Authority & Anr.

M/S Beerengas (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Jindal Saw Limited

Universal Agency Ramgarh Pvt. Ltd. Vs Prl Projects and Infrastructure Ltd.