Allowed¶26

Iccg India Pvt. Ltd. v. Plant Lipids Pvt. Ltd.

Delhi HC7 May 2025O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.)/371/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 29A(4)/(5) extension of arbitral mandate; Delhi High Court; O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 371/2025; ICCG India Pvt Ltd v Plant Lipids Pvt Ltd; Jyoti Singh, J.; decided 07.05.2025; consent extension, respondent no objection; award reserved 06.02.2025; mandate extended two months from 07.05.2025; period 01.04.2025 to 06.05.2025 regularised; Master Service Agreement dated 28.02.2018; Clause 13(ii); ARB. P. 838/2019; Section 11(6); prior extension order dated 04.10.2024 in O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 789/2024.

What did the court decide?

Mandate of the learned Arbitrator extended by two months from 07.05.2025, and the period between 01.04.2025 and 06.05.2025 regularised; the connected application I.A. 11484/2025 (Exemption) was allowed subject to all just exceptions. ¶26

Iccg India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Plant Lipids Pvt. Ltd. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~73

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 371/2025

¶4

ICCG INDIA PVT LTD .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Ms. Tanupriya Gupta and Mr. Kartikeya Tripathi, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

PLANT LIPIDS PVT LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Pranav Jain, Advocate.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

¶10

% 07.05.2025

¶11

I.A. 11484/2025 (Exemption)

¶12

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶13

Application stands disposed of.

¶14

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 371/2025

¶15

This petition is preferred on behalf of the Petitioner under Section 29A (4) and (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘1996 Act’) seeking extension of the mandate of the Arbitrator.

¶16

Disputes having arisen between the parties in relation to a Master Service Agreement dated 28.02.2018 for configuration and implementation of Infor M3 ERP Version 13.4 Solution software, Petitioner invoked the Arbitration Agreement vide notice dated 01.10.2019 in terms of Clause 13(ii) of Master Service Agreement, in response to which, Respondent raised an objection to the arbitrability of claims vide its reply dated

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 371/2025

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

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 01/07/2025 at 16:30:54

¶21

23.10.2019. Petitioner filed a petition in this Court under Section 11(6) of 1996 Act, being ARB. P. 838/2019 seeking appointment of a Sole Arbitrator, which was allowed on 05.02.2020 and a Sole Arbitrator was appointed to adjudicate the disputes.

¶22

It is stated that from time to time, mandate of the learned Arbitrator was extended and lastly vide order dated 04.10.2024 in O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 789/2024 till 31.03.2025. It is further stated that the award had been reserved by the Arbitrator on 06.02.2025 and mandate be extended upto 31.05.2025 to enable the learned Arbitrator to pass and publish the award.

¶23

Issue notice.

¶24

Mr. Pranav Jain, learned counsel for the Respondent accepts notice and on instructions, submits that the Respondent has no objection to the extension of mandate of the learned Arbitrator.

¶25

Accordingly, with the consent of the parties and considering that the award has been reserved, mandate of the learned Arbitrator is extended by two months from 07.05.2025 and period between 01.04.2025 to 06.05.2025 is regularised.

¶26

Petition is allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶27

JYOTI SINGH, J

¶28

MAY 7, 2025 S.Sharma

¶29

Page 2 of 2

¶30

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 371/2025

¶31

This is a digitally signed order.

¶32

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 01/07/2025 at 16:30:54

Iccg India Pvt. Ltd. v. Plant Lipids Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Iccg India Pvt. Ltd. v. Plant Lipids Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Das Construction Vs Container Corporation of India

Rccivl-Litl (Jv) Vs Union of India

Multani Lal Chugh Vs Rajan Elwadhi HUF through Karta Shri Rajan Elwadhi & Anr.

Sarvesh Security Services Pvt. Ltd. through Its Authorized Signatory Col Retd S N P Singh Vs Managing Director Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd.

M/S Pragati Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs National Capital Region Transport Corporation Ltd.

M/S Athaang Dichpally Tollway Private Limited Vs the National Highways Authority of India & Anr.

Rajesh Sharma Vs Grace Welfare Education Society and Ors.

Energy Efficiency Services Limited Vs National Small Industries Corporation Limited & Ors.

Jagwati (Senior Citizen) Vs M/S Tdi Infrastructure Ltd.

Rakesh Kumar Jindal Vs Manju Mehta

M/S Das Construction Vs Container Corporation of India

Meenu Vs Roshani & Ors.

M/S Dream Merchant Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Amd Estates Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Cfm Asset Reconstruction Private Limited Vs National Highways Authority of India