Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, K.I.P.L. Vistacore Infra Projects J.V., filed a Commercial Arbitration Petition under Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking extension of time for completion of pending arbitration proceedings by six months. The dispute arose from a contract awarded by the Municipal Corporation of Ichalkarnji for construction of sewage treatment plants under the UIDSSMT scheme. The petitioner claimed to have completed 55% of work by 2019, but delays were attributed to the respondent's belated handover of land and drawings. The petitioner was blacklisted and its contract terminated, leading to multiple writ petitions. The arbitration was pending, and the time for completion had expired. The court, noting the consent of both parties, allowed the petition and extended the time for completion of arbitration by six months from the date of the order, with the arbitrator to conclude proceedings within that period. The court also directed that the arbitrator's fees be paid as per the schedule and that the parties cooperate for early disposal.
Headnote
A) Arbitration Law - Extension of Time - Section 29-A Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Extension of time for completion of arbitration - Petitioner sought extension of six months for completion of pending arbitration proceedings - Court granted extension with consent of both parties - Held that extension is necessary to conclude arbitration and avoid further litigation (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the time for completion of pending arbitration proceedings should be extended under Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The time for completion of the pending arbitration proceedings is extended by a period of six months from today. The arbitrator shall conclude the proceedings within the extended period. The arbitrator's fees shall be paid as per the schedule. The parties shall cooperate for early disposal.
Law Points
- Extension of time for arbitration under Section 29-A
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act
- 1996
- consent of parties
- completion of arbitration within statutory period
Case Details
2024 LawText (BOM) (01) 143
Commercial Arbitration Petition No.181 of 2023
Mr. Akshay Patil with Mr. Akshay Kamble, Ms. Eesha Karnik, Ms. Devika Madekar, Ms. Neha Patil and Ms. Rina Ram i/b Viveka Partners for the Petitioner. Mr. Girish Godbole, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. Akshay Shinde for the Respondents Nos.2 and 3.
K.I.P.L. Vistacore Infra Projects J.V.
Municipal Corporation of the city of Ichalkarnji
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Commercial Arbitration Petition under Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking extension of time for completion of pending arbitration proceedings.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought extension of time for completion of pending arbitration proceedings by a period of six months.
Filing Reason
The time for completion of arbitration had expired and the petitioner needed extension to conclude the proceedings.
Previous Decisions
The petitioner had filed multiple writ petitions challenging blacklisting and termination of contract, which were disposed of with liberty to make representation or after the respondent passed resolutions.
Issues
Whether the time for completion of arbitration should be extended under Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that delay in arbitration was due to respondent's actions and sought extension. Respondent did not oppose the extension.
Ratio Decidendi
Under Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the court has the power to extend the time for completion of arbitration proceedings, especially when both parties consent and the extension is necessary to conclude the arbitration and avoid further litigation.
Judgment Excerpts
The Arbitration Petition fled by the Petitioner under Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeks extension of time for completion of the pending arbitration proceedings, by a period of six months.
The brief background facts reveal that the Urban Infrastructure Development Scheme for Small and Medium Towns Scheme (UIDSSMT) Mission was launched by the Government of India in the year 2012.
The Petitioner was blacklisted by the Respondent and, hence, it approached this Court in a Writ Petition, which was withdrawn, as Respondent No.1 by its resolution extended the time for completion of the work, by a further period of six months.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging blacklisting, which was withdrawn after respondent extended time. Another writ petition challenging termination was disposed of with liberty to make representation. A subsequent writ petition was filed challenging a resolution, and during its pendency, the respondent passed a resolution to resolve disputes. The petitioner then filed the present arbitration petition under Section 29-A.
Acts & Sections
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 29-A
