Hiranand Kishinchand Gangwani v. Oyo Apartment Investment Llp

$~54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 253/2025 HIRANAND KISHINCHAND GANGWANI .....Petitioner Through:

Mr.

Rishi Bhatnagar and Mr.

Riishabh Gaur, Advocates versus OYO APARTMENT INVESTMENT LLP .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Harsh Prakash, Advocate

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

O R D E R

% 20.03.2025 I.A. 7173/2025 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 253/2025 1.

This is a petition under Section 29A (4) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking extension of mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal for making the arbitral award.

2.

Material on record discloses that this Court vide Order dated 11.10.2021 constituted the Arbitral Tribunal to adjudicate on the disputes between the parties. Pleadings were completed and on expiry of the one year period, the parties mutually extended the mandate of the Arbitrator by six months. Thereafter, the parties approached this Court by filing O.M.P. (MISC.) (COMM.) 325 of 2024 seeking extension of the mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator. This Court vide Order dated 29.04.2024 extended The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/03/2025 at 14:03:37

the mandate of the learned Arbitrator by six months, i.e. till 16.08.2024. Thereafter, the parties once again approached this Court by filing O.M.P. (MISC.) (COMM.) 685 of 2024 seeking extension of the mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator. This Court vide Order dated 05.09.2024 extended the mandate of the learned Arbitrator by six months, i.e. till 04.03.2025. It is stated that matter is at the stage of final arguments. The Petitioner has, therefore, approached this Court seeking extension of the mandate of the Arbitrator.

3.

Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent on advance notice states that the Respondent does not have any objection to the present Petition.

4.

The Apex Court in Rohan Builders (India) Private Limited v. Berger Paints India Limited, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2494, has held that an application for extension of the time period for passing an arbitral award under Section 29A(4) read with Section 29A(5) is maintainable even after the expiry of the twelve-month or the extended six-month period, as the case may be.

5.

In view of the fact that the matter is at an advance stage, this Court is inclined to regularize the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal till today and extend the mandate till 30.11.2025 so that the Award can be pronounced. 6.

The Petition is disposed of along with the pending applications, if any.

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J MARCH 20, 2025 Rahul The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/03/2025 at 14:03:37