Radico Khaitan Limited v. Khoday Industries (Kuppam)Pvt.Lt.

$~43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P. (MISC.) 15/2018 RADICO KHAITAN LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through Mr.B.L.Wali, Adv.

versus KHODAY INDUSTRIES (KUPPAM)PVT.LT.

..... Respondent Through Ms.Nishtha Khurana and Mr.S.Santanam Swaminadhan, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

O R D E R

% 17.08.2018 IA No.10941/2018 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

O.M.P. (MISC.) 15/2018 Issue notice. Notice is accepted by Ms.Nishtha Khurana, Advocate on behalf of the respondent.

With the consent of the parties the petition is taken up for hearing. This petition has been filed under Section 29A (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the „Act‟) seeking extension of time for making of the Arbitral Award by the Sole Arbitrator appointed by this Court vide order dated 03.05.2017 passed in ARB.P.148/2017.

A perusal of the petition shows that the Sole Arbitrator has acted with expedition and there is no reason why the time for making of the Award not be extended further. In fact, the counsel for the respondent had sought time

to seek instructions from the respondent for giving its consent for extension of time for making of the Arbitral Award, however, due to lack of instruction could not convey such consent. Be that as it may, I see sufficient grounds being made out in the petition for grant of extension of time for making of the Award by a further period of nine months with effect from today.

The petition is allowed in the above terms, with no order as to cost. Dasti.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J AUGUST 17, 2018/Arya