The court extended the arbitrator's mandate by six months to account for pandemic-induced delays. It allowed the respondent to claim interest during the extended period of arbitration proceedings before concluding the case.
Arbitrator's mandate extended by six months from the date of the order; respondent allowed to claim interest.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:9895 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Arb. Case No. 685 of 2024
Date of decision : 18.10.2024.
Khem Chand ...Petitioner. Versus National Highway Authority of India & Anr. ...Respondents
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate. For the respondents : Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Gobind Korla, Addl. A.G., for respondent No.2.
Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral)
By way of this application, a prayer has been made to extend the period of mandate of Arbitrator in Arbitration Case No. 19 of 2017.
1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
-2-
mandate had expired in terms of the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
18th October, 2024 (kck)
(Satyen Vaidya) Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the mandate of the Arbitrator should be extended considering the delay caused by the pandemic.
Whether the respondent is entitled to claim interest during the pendency of the arbitral proceedings.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Khem Chand
National Highway Authority of India
Satyen Vaidya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
