Suyojit Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs IIC Limited (Under Liquidation) & Anr.

This is a petition under Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996^{11.“the 1996 Act”, hereinafter} seeking extension of the mandate of the learned Arbitral Tribunal, who was in seisin of the dispute between the parties.

The mandate of the learned Arbitral Tribunal is stated to have expired on 22 July 2023.

There is no reply to this petition from either of the respondents. Respondent 1 is absent when the matter is called out. Mr. Karan Gandhi, who represents the IRP in charge of the affairs of the Respondent 2, submits that as Respondent 1 is in liquidation and Respondent 2 is facing IRP proceedings, the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal cannot be extended.

Mr. Parivesh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this issue has already been addressed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Larsen and Toubro Ltd v IIC Limited^{22.Order dated 2 February 2024, passed in OMP (MISC)(COMM) 426/2023}, in which this Court has held that the fact that the respondent may be facing CIRP proceedings in which an IRP may have even been appointed or facing liquidation, cannot be served as an impediment on the Court extending the mandate of the learned Arbitral Tribunal.

Needless to say, these aspects can also be urged by the respondents before the learned Arbitral Tribunal, which can take a view thereon.

No other ground for opposing the prayer for extending the mandate of the learned Arbitral Tribunal having been adduced, the mandate stands extended by a period of six months from today. The mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal shall be treated as continuing from the date of its expiry till today.

The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.