M/S Hariharr Developers v. Subhash Shrihari Dahiphale

by MULEY SHUBHAM PRAVINRAO Date:

2024.11.27 11:44:15 +0530 MULEY SHUBHAM PRAVINRAO 1 20-ARP-176-2024.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 176 OF 2024 M/s Hariharr Developers & Anr.

...Petitioners

Vs.

Subhash Shrihari Dahiphale & Anr.

...Respondents

----------------- Mr. S. C. Wakankar for the Petitioner.

----------------- CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.

DATE : 25TH NOVEMBER, 2024 P.C.:- 1.

This is an application filed under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 for extension of the mandate of the Tribunal. 2.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioners has placed reliance upon an Affidavit of Service to prove service upon the Respondents. The First Respondent is served vide an email on the same address on which the proceedings of arbitration has been served. It is stated that the email has not bounced back and there has been due service. Respondent No.2 has been duly received physical copy but has not appeared. In these backdrop, I am satisfied that Respondents though served, have chosen not to appear today. Given this, I deem it fit to take up and decide the application filed under Section 29A on its merits. Shubham 1/2

2 20-ARP-176-2024.doc 3.

Learned Counsel submits that this is the first application for extension of time. He submits that the issues have been framed and the matter is now ready for trial. It is in these circumstances he submits that the mandate of the Tribunal be extended in terms of prayer clause (a) which reads thus: "A] That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to extend the mandate of the Ld. Arbitrator by a period of 9 months from the date of the Order, and the Hon'ble Tribunal be directed to complete the proceedings within such period that his Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the present case, on such terms and conditions that this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the present case."

4.

Having regard to the submissions made and the fact that none has appeared to oppose the application as also the fact that sufficient progress has been made in arbitration proceedings, I deem it fit to extend the mandate of the Tribunal by a period of one year from the date on which a copy of this order is uploaded.

5.

Petition is accordingly disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.) Shubham 2/2