Allowed

Rohtak Hissar Tollway Pvt. Ltd. v. National Highways Authority of India

Delhi HC1 Jul 2025O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.)/471/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a 12-month extension of the arbitral tribunal's mandate in disputes under a highway concession agreement. The respondent raised no objection; with consent of parties, the mandate was extended by 12 months from 02.05.2025.

What did the court decide?

Mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal extended by 12 months from 02.05.2025 with consent of parties.

Rohtak Hissar Tollway Pvt. Ltd. Vs National Highways Authority of… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~19

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 471/2025

¶4

ROHTAK HISSAR TOLLWAY PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Dinesh Moorjani, Mr. Girish Ahuja and Ms. Richa Bhargava, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA

¶8

.....Respondent Through: Ms. Muskan Gopal and Ms. Smriti Sapru, Advocates.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

¶11

O R D E R % 01.07.2025

¶12

This petition is filed 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 learned Arbitral Tribunal by a period of 12 months.

¶13

Disputes having arisen between the parties in relation to Concession Agreement dated 27.05.2013 executed between the parties for construction of 4 Laning of Rohtak to Hisar Section of NH-10 from Km. 87.000 (NH-10) to Km. 348.00 (NH-71) containing Arbitration Clause 44.3, an Arbitral Tribunal was constituted on 04.05.2023 to adjudicate the disputes. It is stated in the petition that the arbitral proceedings are at the stage of final arguments on behalf of the Respondent, including arguments on an application dated 24.01.2025 filed by the Petitioner to place on record four

¶14

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 471/2025

¶15

Page 1 of 2

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

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 03/07/2025 at 04:22:08

¶18

additional documents and e-mail dated 30.03.2025 sent by the Respondent to place on record three additional documents. It is further stated that mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal after extension by six months with mutual consent of the parties has expired on 01.05.2025 and by Procedural Order No. 37 dated 21.05.2025, the Arbitral Tribunal directed the parties to file an application for seeking extension to conclude the arbitral proceedings.

¶19

Issue notice.

¶20

Ms. Muskan Gopal, learned counsel accepts notice for the Respondent and on instructions, submits that Respondent has no objection to the extension of mandate of the learned Arbitral Tribunal.

¶21

Accordingly, with the consent of the parties, mandate of the learned Arbitral Tribunal is extended by a period of 12 months from 02.05.2025. 6. Petition is allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶22

JYOTI SINGH, J

¶23

JULY 01, 2025 S.Sharma

¶24

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 471/2025

¶25

Page 2 of 2

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 03/07/2025 at 04:22:08

Rohtak Hissar Tollway Pvt. Ltd. v. National Highways Authority of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohtak Hissar Tollway Pvt. Ltd. v. National Highways Authority of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ahluwalia Contracts India Limited Vs Delhi Agricultural Marketing Board

Gmr Power and Urban Infra Limited Vs Gajlaxmi Urban Infratech Pvt. Ltd.

Gmr Pochanpalli Expessways Limited Vs National Highways Authority of India

Dimeco (Formerly Known as Dimeco Alipressethrough Its Indian Agent Mis Kriti Inter Trade Vs Central Organisation for Modernization of Workshops through Controller of Stores & Anr.

Emerald Industries Vs Tata Aldesa Jv

Ansaldo Signal Consortium and Anr. Vs North Central Railway Project Unit

Bagrrys India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Rajendra Mittal

M/S Ve Commercial Vehicles Limited through Authorised Representative Shri Vipin Surana Vice Presid Vs M/S Shri Krishna Motor Company & Ors.

Dimeco (Formerly Known as Dimeco Alipressethrough Its Indian Agent Mis Kriti Inter Trade Vs Central Organisation for Modernization of Workshops through Controller of Stores & Anr.

Deepak & Ors. Vs University of Delhi & Ors.

M/S Panipat Jalandhar Tollways Pvt. Ltd. Vs National Highways Authority of India

Paramount Wires and Cables Ltd. Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited

Shubham Infrastructure Private Limited Vs M/S Aaa Hospitality through Its Partner Abhinav Seth and Ors.

Emerald Industries Vs Tata Aldesa Jv