AMR INDIA LTD v. NTPC LTD

Delhi High Court · 30 Sep 2019 · 2019:DHC:5043
Jyoti Singh
O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 389/2019
2019:DHC:5043
civil petition_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court granted a further nine-month extension for making the arbitral award under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, recognizing the complexity and voluminous nature of the arbitration proceedings.

Full Text
Translation output
O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 389/2019
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 30.09.2019
O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 389/2019
AMR INDIA LTD ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Brijesh Kumar Goel, Advocate.
VERSUS
NTPC LTD. ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Puneet Taneja and Mr. Manmohan Singh Narula, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH JYOTI SINGH, J. (ORAL)
I.A. 13634/2019 (Exemption)
Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
JUDGMENT

1. Issue notice.

2. Mr. Puneet Taneja, Advocate, enters appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

3. This is a petition has been filed under Section 29B(5) read with Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Act’) seeking extension of time making the Award.

4. The Arbitration commenced on 07.03.2017 under Section 29 B of the Act under the ‘Fast Track Procedure’.

5. The statutory period of twelve months for making the Award expired on 06.03.2018. The petitioner approached this Court in OMP 2019:DHC:5043 (Misc.)(Comm.) 60/2018 for grant of extension of nine months and this Court vide order dated 23.04.2018 extended the time till 31.12.2018.

6. During the extended period, the parties filed their supplementary statement of claim and counter claim. The affidavit of evidence of the witnesses was filed on 18.08.2018. The cross-examination of RW-1 could not be completed by 21.12.2018 and thus the petitioner again approached this Court in OMP (Misc)(Comm.) 02/2019 for a further extension of nine months. This Court vide order dated 07.01.2019 extended the time till 30.09.2019.

7. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that after completion of the evidence, arguments have commenced. Since the records are voluminous and technical issues are involved, some more time will be required for completion of the proceedings.

8. Mr. Puneet Taneja, Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent, on instructions from the respondent, submits that he has no objection to the time being extended.

9. With the consent of the parties, time for completion of the proceedings and for passing of the Award is extended by a period of nine months from 30.09.2019.

10. The petition is allowed in the above terms.

JYOTI SINGH, J SEPTEMBER 30, 2019 rd/