Disposed

M/S Anjani Industries v. M/S Manjeet Plastic Industries

Delhi HC4 Jul 2025O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.)/491/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitions under Section 29A(4) and (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act sought six-month extension of the Sole Arbitrator's mandate in commercial disputes, proceedings being at evidence stage. With respondent's no-objection, mandate extended by six months from 04.07.2025 and intervening period regularised.

What did the court decide?

Mandate of Sole Arbitrator extended by six months from 04.07.2025; period 22.04.2025 to 03.07.2025 regularised; petitions allowed and disposed.

M/S Anjani Industries Vs M/S Manjeet Plastic Industries — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~48 & 50

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 491/2025 M/S ANJANI INDUSTRIES .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Ritu Dhingra, Advocate.

¶3

versus

¶4

M/S MANJEET PLASTIC INDUSTRIES .....Respondent Through: Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, Mr. Shashank Khurana, and Ms. Saubhagaya Sundriyal, Advocates.

¶5

50 + O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 495/2025 LIBERTY SHOES LTD. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajiv K. Garg, Mr. Ashok Rana, Mr. Ashish Garg and Mr. Govind Singh, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

M/S MANJEET PLASTIC INDUSTRIES .....Respondent Through: Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, Mr. Shashank Khurana, and Ms. Saubhagaya Sundriyal, Advocates.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 04.07.2025

¶12

I.A. 15332/2025 (Exemption) in O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 491/2025 and I.A. 15337/2025 (Exemption) in O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 495/2025

¶13

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶14

Applications stand disposed of.

¶15

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 491/2025 & O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 495/2025

¶16

These petitions are filed by the respective Petitioners under Section 29A (4) and (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘1996 Act’)

¶17

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 491/2025 and connected matter

¶18

Page 1 of 2

¶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 14/07/2025 at 13:17:26

¶21

for extension of mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator by a period of six months.

¶22

Disputes having arisen between the parties concerning business transactions between them, this Court appointed a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes in a petition filed under Section 11(6) of 1996 Act. In both the petitions, it is stated that the arbitral proceedings are at the stage of recording of Respondent’s evidence and a period of six months is required to conclude the proceedings and pass the arbitral awards. Mandate of the learned Arbitrator is stated to have expired on 21.04.2025.

¶23

Issue notice. 6. Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the Respondent in both the petitions and on instructions, submits that Respondent has no objection to the extension of mandate of the Arbitrator, albeit he submits that Respondent is open to amicable settlement of the inter se disputes.

¶24

Accordingly, with the consent of the parties, mandate of the learned Arbitrator is extended by a period of six months from 04.07.2025 and period between 22.04.2025 to 03.07.2025 is regularised in both the petitions.

¶25

In the meantime, it is open to the parties to explore the possibility of amicable settlement of their disputes.

¶26

Petitions are allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶27

JYOTI SINGH, J

¶28

JULY 4, 2025/ S.Sharma

¶29

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 491/2025 and connected matter

¶30

Page 2 of 2

¶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 14/07/2025 at 13:17:26

M/S Anjani Industries v. M/S Manjeet Plastic Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Anjani Industries v. M/S Manjeet Plastic Industries

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

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.

Engineering Projects India Ltd. Vs Jra Infratech

Emerald Industries Vs Tata Aldesa Jv

Manpowergroup Services India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Skillstech Services Private Limited

M/S Jap Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Vs Delhi Tourism and Transportation Development Corporation Ltd.

Mb Power (Madhya Pradesh) Limited Vs the New India Assurance Company Ltd.

Sterling and Wilson Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mata Amritanandamayi Math

Parsvnath Estate Developers Private Limited Vs Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Private Limited

Affordable Infrastructure and Housing Projects Private Limited Vs M/S Happyeasygo India Pvt. Ltd.

Bagrrys India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Rajendra Mittal

Express Food Services Vs Indian Raiwlay Catering and Tourism Corporation Limited

Sharad Maheshwari Vs Suresh Chandra Pal & Ors.

Sunsource Energy Private Limited Vs Ekialde Solar Private Limited