UNION OF INDIA Vs. NAR BAHADUR DAHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter was initially mentioned by the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India at the first sitting of the Court today. This Court, after hearing her, directed the Registry to place the matter in the supplementary causelist and also directed the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India to inform the learned Advocate for the respondent who had earlier appeared in the matter. When the matter is taken up for consideration, Mr. Sajal Sharma, learned Advocate appears on behalf of the respondent. Before the application is taken up for hearing it is noticed by this Court that the petitioner has moved this application as a fresh Arbitration Petition (being Arbitration Petition No.02 of 2023) whereas it ought to be an interlocutory application in connection with Arbitration Petition No. 03 of 2021, since this application is essentially for the purpose of seeking extension of time for the Arbitrator to make his award in connection with Arbitration Petition No. 03 of 2021. This Court, therefore, directs the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India to make necessary changes in the application so that the Registry re-registers the application as an interlocutory application in connection with Arbitration Petition No. 03 of 2021.

(2.) This is an application filed by the Union of India under Sec. 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking extension of the mandate of the Arbitrator, which is due to expire on 13/3/2024.

(3.) The respondent consents to such prayer for extension of time. For the purpose of granting extension of time for the Arbitrator to make his award, one has to - at first - look at sub-sec. (4) of Sec. 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which reads as follows: -