Disposed

Rattan Thakur and Ors. v. NHAI and Ors.

Himachal Pradesh HC17 Jun 2024ARB.C/569/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order extends the arbitrator's mandate to adjudicate a reference petition under the National Highways Act by six months, as the statutory time limit under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, had elapsed. The court applied Section 29A(4) to grant this extension.

What did the court decide?

The mandate of the learned Arbitrator to decide the reference petition is extended by six months from 17.06.2024.

Rattan Thakur and Ors. Vs NHAI and Ors. — Arbitration | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

¶2

Arb.Case No.569 of 2024 Decided on: 17^th June, 2024.

¶3

_________________________________________________________________ Rattan Thakur & Ors. ...Petitioners Versus NHAI & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram_ Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioners : Mr. Peeyush Verma and Mr. Anuj Bali, Advocates. For the respondents : Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.1. : Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.2. : Mr. L.N. Sharma and Mr. Varun Chandel, Additional Advocates General, for respondents No.3 and 4.

¶4

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶5

It is not in dispute that a Reference Petition bearing No.276/2017 preferred by the petitioner under Section 3G of the National Highways Act is pending adjudication before the learned Arbitrator, i.e. the Divisional Commissioner, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. The period of 12 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes

¶6

¶7

months in terms of Section 29A(1) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short ‘the Act’), available to the learned Arbitrator for passing the award stands elapsed. The period specified under Section 29A(3) of the Act is also over, hence, the learned Arbitrator has closed the proceedings in view of termination of his mandate. In these circumstances,

¶8

the petitioner has prayed for extending the time for pronouncing the award by six months.

¶9

I have heard learned counsel on both sides and considered the case file. It has been informed that in similar matters, taking recourse to Section 29A(4) of the Act, the Courts have extended the period for passing the award by six months.

¶10

The petitioner has made out a case for extending the period for deciding the arbitration proceedings by six months. Ordered accordingly. The mandate of learned Arbitrator in deciding the petition under reference is extended by six months from today. The parties, through their learned counsel, are directed to appear before the learned Arbitrator on 27.06.2024. All rights and contentions of the parties are left open to be adjudicated by the learned Arbitrator.

¶11

¶12

The petition stands disposed of in the above

¶13

terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if

¶14

any.

¶15

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶16

June 17^th , 2024 Pardeep

Rattan Thakur and Ors. v. NHAI and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rattan Thakur and Ors. v. NHAI and Ors.

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

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Ors. Vs M/s Amar Service Station

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Ors. Vs M/s Mohan Singh and Ors.

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Ors. Vs Puri Hp Centre

Meera Devi and Ors. Vs NHAI and Ors.

Bishan Thakur and Ors. Vs NHAI and Ors.

M/S Harisons Hydel Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and Another