Allowed¶26

M/S Indian Potash Limited v. M/S Prem Sakhi Fartilizer Limited

Delhi HC9 Sept 2025O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.)/744/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 29A(4)/(5) Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 extension of arbitrator mandate; Delhi High Court; Indian Potash Ltd v Prem Sakhi Fartilizer Ltd; O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 744/2025; mandate expired 04.09.2025 after one-year extension dated 05.09.2024 (O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 684/2024); arbitrator appointed 27.07.2020 (ARB.P. 228/2020, Section 11(6)); award reserved; consensual six-month extension from 05.09.2025; petition allowed and disposed of on 09.09.2025 by Jyoti Singh, J.

What did the court decide?

Extension of the mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator by six months from 05.09.2025, with the consent of both parties, to enable pronouncement of the reserved award. ¶26

M/S Indian Potash Limited Vs M/S Prem Sakhi Fartilizer Limited — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~58

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 744/2025

¶4

M/S INDIAN POTASH LIMITED .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Manish Kaushik and Mr. Yashpriya Sahran, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

M/S PREM SAKHI FARTILIZER LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr. Jeevesh Nagrath, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Arjun Gaur and Ms. Nitya Maheshwari, Advocates.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 09.09.2025

¶12

I.A. 22130/2025 (Exemption)

¶13

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶14

Application stands disposed of.

¶15

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 744/2025

¶16

This petition is filed on behalf of the Petitioner under Section 29A (4) and (5) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘1996 Act’) seeking extension of the mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator by a period of six months.

¶17

Disputes having arisen between the parties, Petitioner filed a petition under Section 11(6) of 1996 Act seeking appointment of the Sole Arbitrator, being ARB.P. 228/2020, which was allowed on 27.07.2020, appointing a Sole Arbitrator. Mandate of the Arbitrator was successively extended by this

¶18

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 744/2025

¶19

Page 1 of 2

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

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 16/09/2025 at 12:36:45

¶22

Court and lastly vide order dated 05.09.2024 in O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 684/2024 by a period of one year, which has expired on 04.09.2025. It is stated that award has been reserved for pronouncement by the Arbitrator and thus, mandate be extended to enable the Arbitrator to pronounce the award.

¶23

Issue notice.

¶24

Mr. Arjun Gaur, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the Respondent and on instructions, submits that Respondent has no objection to the extension of mandate of the Arbitrator albeit the allegations as also the averments in the petition, pertaining to merits of the disputes are denied.

¶25

Accordingly, with the consent of the parties, mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator is extended by a period of 06 months from 05.09.2025.

¶26

Petition is allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶27

JYOTI SINGH, J

¶28

SEPTEMBER 9, 2025

¶29

S.Sharma

¶30

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 744/2025

¶31

Page 2 of 2

¶32

This is a digitally signed order.

¶33

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 16/09/2025 at 12:36:45

M/S Indian Potash Limited v. M/S Prem Sakhi Fartilizer Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Indian Potash Limited v. M/S Prem Sakhi Fartilizer Limited

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

Aryan Infraheight Private Ltd. Vs Tdi Infrastructure Limited

Aryan Infraheight Private Ltd. Vs Tdi Infrastructure Limited

Samsung India Electronics Private Limited Vs Enn Enn Corp Limited

M/S Tantra Design Pvt. Ltd. Vs My Preferred Transformation and Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

Gtl Limited Vs Gtl Infrastructure Limited

M/S a K Gulati and Sons Vs Union of India

Tata Capital Limited Transferee of Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. Vs Ms Jv Steel Tubes and Ors.

Goyala Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Engineer in Chief Military Engineering Services

Oyo Hotels and Homes Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mr. Subrat Kumar Panda

Supreme Infrastructure India Ltd. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Aryan Infraheight Private Ltd. Vs Tdi Infrastructure Limited

Oyo Hotels and Homes Private Limited Vs M/S Hotel Hill Top through Its Proprietor Dilipbhai Dahyabhai Patel

M/S Synergy Rail Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Vs Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd.

M/S Vishwakarma Projects(India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs National Building Construction Corporation Limited & Ors.