LILADITYA DEB Vs. TARA RANJAN PATTANAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode.

(2.) This writ petition involves a challenge to the order passed by the District Judge, Bhubaneswar vide Anenxure-3 in ARB(P) No.68 of 2018, dated 3.8.2019, allowing an application under Sub-Section (4) and (5) of Section 29-A of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. As it appears, learned District Judge, Bhubaneswar in allowing the arbitration petition finally extended the mandate of the Arbitrator for one year with effect from the date of judgment dated 3.8.2019. Even though the extension of the mandate of the Arbitrator has expired in the meantime, but however, since the mandate of the Arbitrator requires extension in the peculiar circumstance involving the case, the matter needs to be finally adjudicated. This Court thus proceeds to record the factual aspect involving the case as follows :

(3.) Be that as it may, for the arbitration proceeding could not be concluded during reasonable time in terms of Section 29A(i) of the Act, 1996, opposite party filed application under Sub-Sections 4 and 5 of Section 29-A of the Act for extension of time to conclude the arbitration proceeding by the learned Arbitrator. Application so moved to the learned District Judge, Bhubaneswar was registered as ARB(P) No.68 of 2018. The brief further discloses that the opposite party no.2 also filed ARBP No.534 of 2014, the District Judge, in disposal of this ARBP No.534 of 2014 on 20.03.2015 by appointing Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M. Das (Retd.) as Arbitrator, which order of course did not materialize.