M/S Aynaz Construction India Private Limited v. Sirajunnissa Begum,

A NO. 424 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 31-01-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI A No. 424 of 2025 M/s Aynaz Construction India Private Limited Old No.14, New No.31, Kutty Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai600 034 represented by its director Mr.A.Syed Ismail Refeek, Old No.14, New No.31, Kutty Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai 34 Applicant(s) Vs Sirajunnissa Begum, Old No.14, New No.31, Kutty Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai600 034, W/o. of Late Abdul Hadi, New No.8, Old No.AP-1687 103rd Street, 14th Sector, K.K.Nagar, Chennai 78 and 6 Others Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr.E.K.Kumaresan For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Sadasharam & Mrs.R.Meenakshi for 1 to 7

ORDER

This Application has been filed for extension of mandate of the sole Arbitrator. 2.Heard Mr.E.K.Kumaresan, learned counsel for the Applicant and Mr.S.Sadasharam, learned counsel for the respondents.

3. I have gone through the affidavit filed in support of the above Application seeking extension of the mandate of the sole Arbitrator.

4. It is seen from the affidavit that pursuant to the learned Arbitrator entering upon reference, the parties tried to settle their disputes before the learned Arbitrator and however on 21.12.2024, settlement talks failed and now the parties are intending to https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

proceed on merits of the claim/defence respectively. It is admitted by both sides that Arbitral mandate expires on 02.01.2025. It is also stated that non completion of the learned Arbitrator was neither attributable to the sole Arbitrator nor the parties, but only because of the prolonged settlement talks. I am satisfied with the reasons assigned seeking extension of the mandate of the sole Arbitrator is hereby extended for a period of four months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

5. Accordingly, this Application is ordered.

31-01-2025 rkp https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis