Arbitration Application seeking extension of time for award passing beyond 12 months. Court held no intervention needed as parties agreed to seek consented extension directly from the Arbitrator.
None. The application was disposed of as no order was required from the Court.
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.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
MAIN CASE No: Arbitration Application No.193 of 2022
PROCEEDING SHEET
| Sl. No. |
Date | ORDER | OFFICE NOTE |
|---|---|---|---|
| 14. | 22.08.2025 | HCJ (AKrS,J) I.A.No.1 of 2025 Mr. N.Saida Rao, learned counsel representing Mr. Md. Khasim Razvi, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. K.Sai Varun, learned counsel |
|
| representing M/s. Indus Law Firm appears for the respondent. The present I.A. has been preferred for extension of the time for concluding the arbitration proceedings under Arbitration Application No.193 of 2022 since the 12 |
|||
| months from the commencement of the proceedings has expired on 16.07.2025. Earlier, the appointment of the sole |
|||
| Arbitrator was made by this Court_vide_order dated 05.07.2024. The arbitration |
|||
| proceedings commenced from 27.07.2024 as per the procedural order of that date. |
|||
| Sub-Section (3) of Section 29A of the |
|||
| Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 |
|||
| provides that the parties may, by consent, |
2
| extend the period specified in Sub-Section | (1) |
|---|---|
| for making an award for a further period | not |
| exceeding six months. Sub-Section provides that if the award is not made wit the period specified in Sub-Section (1) or extended period specified under Sub-Sec |
(4) hin the tion |
| (3), the mandate of the Arbitrator s terminate unless the Court has, either prio or after the expiry of the period so specif extended the period. In the instant c |
hall r to ied, ase, |
| both the parties who are before this Co | urt |
| have the option to extend the period | for |
| making an award beyond 12 months b | y a |
| further period not exceeding six months. Learned counsel for both the par agreed that such a consented extension |
ties of |
| time would be submitted before the lear | ned |
| Arbitrator. | |
| In that view of the matter, there is | no |
| occasion for this Court pass any order | for |
extension of time for making the award. The instant I.A., therefore, sta |
nds |
| disposed of. ______________ HCJ (AKrS KL |
___ ,J) |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether this Court should grant an extension of time for making the award under Section 29A(3) and (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 when parties agreed to submit consent before the Ar
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mr. Md. Khasim Razvi
M/s. Indus Law Firm
HCJ (AKrS, J)
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
