Arbitrator's Mandate Can Be Extended If Non-Completion Of Proceedings In 12 Months Is Due To Delays Not Attributable To Petitioner: Himachal Pradesh HC

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Ranjan Sharma has held that the mandate of the Arbitrator can be extended under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 if the arbitral proceedings are not completed within 12 months due to reasons not attributable to the petitioner, as failing to do so would cause grave prejudice to the petitioner. The arbitral proceedings were closed and the mandate of Arbitrator was treated to have been terminated on the ground that arbitral proceedings could not be completed within the time schedule as per Section 29A and Section 29A of the Arbitration Act. It further added that though, the arbitral proceedings under Section 29A and Section 29A are to be completed within 18 months period yet in case due to unforeseen eventualities the arbitral proceedings are not completed within 18 months, then the law-makers were conscious enough by prescribing a remedy under Section 29A, for extending the period of arbitral proceedings, only for sufficient cause and on such terms and conditions, as may be imposed by the Court. Ltd. vs. Siva Industries and Holdings Ltd. and others held that “in terms of Section 29A, in case the arbitral award was not rendered within the twelve or eighteen month period as the case may be, the mandate of the arbitrator would stand terminated, unless on an application made by any of the parties, the court extended time on sufficient cause being shown.” Similarly, the Supreme Court in Rohan Builders Private Limited versus Berger Paints India Limited held that under Section 29A, the power of the court to extend the time is to be exercised only in cases where there is sufficient cause for such extension.