Disposed¶21

S B Protech Private Limited v. Dlf Limited

Delhi HC15 Sept 2025O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.)/763/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 29A(4) and (5) Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996; extension of mandate of Sole Arbitrator; O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 763/2025; S B Protech Private Limited v. DLF Limited; ARB.P. 868/2022; Contract Agreement dated 01.06.2016; mandate expired 08.02.2025; mediation 15.07.2024 to 08.08.2025 ended not settled; sufficient cause; consent extension of nine months from 15.09.2025; regularisation of expired period 09.02.2025 to 14.09.2025; Delhi High Court; Jyoti Singh, J.; order dated 15.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

Mandate of the Sole Arbitrator extended by nine months from 15.09.2025 with the consent of the parties; the period between 09.02.2025 and 14.09.2025 regularised. ¶21

S B Protech Private Limited Vs Dlf Limited — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~72

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 763/2025

¶4

S B PROTECH PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Vikas Sethi, Mr. Vansh Sethi, Ms. Vaishali, Ms. Samridhi Malhotra and Mr. Chitresh Mittal, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

DLF LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr. Saurabh Kumar, Mr. Rohan Sharma and Ms. Unnimaya, Advocates.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

¶10

O R D E R % 15.09.2025

¶11

This petition is filed on behalf of the Petitioner under Section 29A(4) and (5) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (81996 Act9) seeking extension of mandate of the Sole Arbitrator.

¶12

Disputes having arisen between the parties in connection with Contract Agreement dated 01.06.2016, petition under Section 11(6) of 1996 Act being ARB.P. 868/2022 was filed in this Court for appointment of an Arbitrator, which was allowed on 31.10.2022 and Sole Arbitrator was appointed, whereafter the Arbitrator entered upon reference but soon thereafter parties were referred for mediation. Matter could not be settled before the Mediator and the arbitral proceedings resumed. It is stated in the petition that delay in completion of the proceedings is owing to mediation proceedings, which were genuinely resorted to by the parties. It is further

¶13

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 763/2025

¶14

Page 1 of 2

¶15

This is a digitally signed order.

¶16

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 22/09/2025 at 12:09:35

¶17

stated that the arbitral proceedings are at the stage of recording of evidence of Claimant9s witness No. 1 and the mandate of the learned Arbitrator has expired on 08.02.2025.

¶18

Issue Notice.

¶19

Mr. Saurabh Kumar, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the Respondent and on instructions, submits that Respondent has no objection to the extension of the mandate.

¶20

It is a matter of record that in an attempt to explore the possibility of amicable settlement of inter se disputes, parties were referred for mediation on 15.07.2024 and the mediation proceedings went on till 08.08.2025 when they ended as not settled. In my view, sufficient cause has been made out by the Petitioner for seeking extension of the mandate of the learned Arbitrator. 6. Accordingly, with the consent of the parties, mandate of the Sole Arbitrator is extended by a period of 09 months from 15.09.2025 and the period between 09.02.2025 to 14.09.2025 is regularized.

¶21

Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶22

JYOTI SINGH, J

¶23

SEPTEMBER 15, 2025 Ch

¶24

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 763/2025

¶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 22/09/2025 at 12:09:35

S B Protech Private Limited v. Dlf Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S B Protech Private Limited v. Dlf 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

Energy Efficiency Services Ltd. through Its Authorised Singnatory Mr Anil Agrawal Vs a One Realtors Pvt. Ltd. through Its Director Mr K K Wadhwa

Raipur Expressways Limited Vs National Highway Authority of India

M/S Ge Vernova T and D India Ltd. Vs M/S Vishal Shankta

Millennium City Expressways Private Limited Vs National Highways Authority of India

M/S Century 21 Malls Private Limited Vs M/S Beyond Malls LLP

Varun Gupta Vs Union of India through Cpwd

Ctrls Datacenters Limited Vs All India Council for Technical Education

Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. Vs Ircon International Ltd.

Energy Efficiency Services Ltd. through Its Authorised Singnatory Mr Anil Agrawal Vs a One Realtors Pvt. Ltd. through Its Director Mr K K Wadhwa

Dilshad Khan Vs Gnct of Delhi

Kushal Polysacks Private Limited Vs My Preferred Transformation and Hospitality Private Limited

Himalayan Hygienic Food and Drinks Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs Bevtek L.L.P

Ikramuddin Vs Rahisuddin

Iifl Home Finance Ltd. Vs Bhim Singh & Anr.