The High Court of Rajasthan granted three months additional time to a sole arbitrator to conclude arbitration proceedings under Section 29-A of the Arbitration Act, 1996, considering the case ripe for final arguments.
Extended three months time to the learned Arbitrator to pass the award in the dispute.
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.
[2023:RJ-JP:12915]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Arbitration Application No.5/2023
Hemendra Singh Solanki Son Of Shri Ummed Singh Solanki, Aged About 45 Years, Proprietor M/s Om Filling Station, Sectore - 4, Hiran Magari, Udaipur, R/o 3/144, Nakoda Nagar, Sectore-3, Hiran Magari, Udaipur.
----(Claimant) Applicant
Versus
----Respondents
----Proforma-Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Ravi Bhojak, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr.Sandeep Pathak, Adv. with Ms.Vartika Mehra, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR Order
02/06/2023
Matter comes up on arbitration Application filed by the applicant under Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter read as ‘the Act of 1996’) for extension of time for conclusion of the arbitration proceedings before the sole Arbitrator.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the dispute between the parties was referred to the learned Arbitrator and as such the arbitration proceedings were commenced on 28.06.2019.
[2023:RJ-JP:12915]
[ARBAP-5/2023]
(2 of 3)
Learned counsel submitted that learned Arbitrator had conducted the proceedings and witnesses were also examined and cross-examined, however, on account of COVID-19, proceedings could not be conducted in expeditious manner.
Learned counsel submitted that at the stage of final arguments, the respondent No.1 – Indian Oil Corporation Limited even filed the application to take certain documents on record and witnesses were also to be cross-examined in respect of those documents.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the respondent had raised an objection on 05.11.2022 before the Arbitrator that statutory period for passing the award has expired.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that counsel appearing for the IOCL did not give his consent for extension of period for passing award under sub-section (3) of the 29A of the Act of 1996 and as such applicant is constrained to approach to this Court for seeking extension of time for passing the award.
Learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant.
Learned counsel submitted that the Arbitrator was appointed way back on 28.09.2019 and now almost 4 years have passed but the proceedings have not been concluded.
Learned counsel submitted that COVID-19 was also over in later part of 2021 and entire year of 2022 has gone but the proceedings have not been concluded and the same has been adjourned on one reason or another.
Learned counsel further submitted that learned Arbitrator though has noted the objection raised by the respondent,
[2023:RJ-JP:12915]
[ARBAP-5/2023]
(3 of 3)
however, the time which has been sought in the present application, is not a bona-fide move by the applicant.
Learned counsel also submits that the expenses and fees are also paid by the respondents in conducting the arbitration proceedings wherein as many as 61 to 70 hearings have taken place.
Learned counsel for the respondent also submits that even the subject-matter i.e. land for retail outlet is also not available now as the lease period has already expired.
I have heard the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
I have gone through the order-sheets drawn by the learned Arbitrator. I find that the case is ripe for final arguments.
This Court, considering the entire facts of the case and in the interest of justice, deems it proper to grant further three months time to pass the award in the dispute, pending before the learned Arbitrator.
Accordingly, the present arbitration application stands allowed and three months’ time is extended. It is expected from the learned Arbitrator that proceedings may be concluded by the end of August, 2023.
(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J
Monika/34
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court should grant an extension of time for the arbitral tribunal to pass the final award.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Hemendra Singh Solanki
Indian Oil Corporation Limited
Chief Divisional Retail Sales Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Limited
Hon'ble Justice Mahesh Bhagwati (Retd.)
Ashok Kumar Gaur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
