Allowed

M/S Aadhar Stumbh Township Pvt. Ltd. v. NTPC Limited

Delhi HC18 Aug 2025O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.)/643/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Section 29A sought extension of the arbitral mandate in a dispute between a township company and NTPC, proceedings being at the evidence stage. The court extended the mandate by one year and regularised the expired period.

What did the court decide?

Mandate of Arbitral Tribunal extended for one year; expired period from 25 July 2025 regularised.

M/S Aadhar Stumbh Township Pvt. Ltd. Vs NTPC Limited — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~38

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 643/2025

¶4

M/S AADHAR STUMBH TOWNSHIP PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vivekanand, Advocate

¶5

versus

¶6

NTPC LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr. Adarsh Tripathi, Mr. Vikram Singh Baid and Mr. Ajitesh Garg, Advocates

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL O R D E R

¶8

% 18.08.2025

¶9

This petition has been filed under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking extension of mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal.

¶10

Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent on advance notice supports the petition.

¶11

It is jointly submitted by the parties that the arbitration proceedings are at the stage of recording of evidence of the respondent’s witness. It is further stated that arbitral records are voluminous, therefore, it would require some time to render a final award.

¶12

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal is extended for a further period of one year from today.

¶13

The period when the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal expired, i.e., from 25^th July, 2025 till today, is also regularised.

¶14

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 643/2025

¶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 20/08/2025 at 12:29:51

¶18

Counsel for the parties assure the Court that the parties will not take any unnecessary adjournment and shall try to cooperate with the Arbitral Tribunal so that the award can be rendered within the extended period.

¶19

AMIT BANSAL, J

¶20

AUGUST 18, 2025/ds

¶21

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 643/2025

¶22

Page 2 of 2

¶23

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 20/08/2025 at 12:29:51

M/S Aadhar Stumbh Township Pvt. Ltd. v. NTPC Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Aadhar Stumbh Township Pvt. Ltd. v. NTPC Limited

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

Johnson Controls Hitachi Air Conditioning India Ltd. Vs Mahamaya Infrastructure Private Ltd.

M/S Wave Geo-Services Private Limited Vs M/S Devi Engineering and Constructions Private Limited

G. R Infra Project Limited Vs National Highways Authority of India

M/S Man Bhawan Garments Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ankit Khilwani

Select Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs Advent Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.

Ss Supply Chain Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Okaya Power Pvt. Ltd.

M/S Patni Golden Transport Company Vs National Seeds Corporation Limited & Anr.

Glowsun Powergen Private Limited Vs Hammond Power Solutions Private Limited

M/S Man Bhawan Garments Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ankit Khilwani

Ms. Aarti Vs Sh. Anand Pal & Anr.

M/S Pink City Expressway Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Chief Engineer,Nh, Public Works Department Government of Rajasthan & Anr.

Manik Motors India LLP Vs Bank of Baroda & Ors.

Smt. Saroj Sharma Vs Sh. Mahinder Sharma and Ors.

91 Springboard Business Hub Pvt. Ltd. Vs Oyela Technologies Private Limited