TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Arbitration Award Deadline Extended to 2025; Cooperation Emphasized and New Arbitrator Appointment Ordered.</h1> <h3>ROHAN BUILDERS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED Versus BERGER PAINTS INDIA LIMITED</h3> The SC extended the deadline for making and publishing the Award under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to 31.05.2025, ... Extension of time for making and passing/publishing of the Award under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - HELD THAT:- The period during which the interim order passed by this Court was in operation, will be excluded for the purpose of computation of the period for making and passing/publishing of the Award under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Applications disposed off. Issues:1. Extension of time for making and passing/publishing of the Award under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.2. Validity of extension of time for Arbitral Tribunal.3. Revival of a case due to the expiration of the learned Arbitrator.4. Justification for extension of time for the Arbitral Tribunal.5. Dismissal of appeals based on a previous judgment.6. Continuation of arbitration proceedings.Analysis:1. The Supreme Court allowed the appeals in various cases and extended the time for making and passing/publishing of the Award under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, till 31.05.2025. The Court emphasized the importance of cooperation from both parties and directed the Arbitral Tribunal to record any adjournments taken, ensuring the proceedings are not unduly prolonged.2. In a case where the learned Arbitrator had expired, the Court set aside a judgment that restricted the extension of time under Section 29A if a petition was not filed before the Arbitral Tribunal's tenure ended. The Court revived a case and directed it to be decided by the High Court in accordance with the law. The appellant was granted the opportunity to seek an extension of interim relief before the High Court.3. The Court heard arguments on the extension of time under Section 29A in another case and extended the time for making and passing/publishing of the Award. All pleas and contentions were left open, and pending applications were disposed of accordingly.4. In cases where there was insufficient justification for extending the time for the Arbitral Tribunal to make and pass/publish its Award, the Court remitted the matters to the High Court for the appointment of a new Arbitrator. Parties were directed to appear before the High Court to expedite the process, and pending applications were disposed of.5. The Court dismissed certain appeals based on a previous judgment and vacated interim orders. It excluded the period during which the stay was granted from the computation of the period for making and pronouncing/publishing the Award. Parties were allowed to invoke the jurisdiction of the Court/Arbitrator for any unresolved issues.6. The Court dismissed an appeal but allowed the continuation of arbitration proceedings. The time for making and passing/publishing the Award was extended, and pending applications were disposed of.This detailed analysis covers the various legal issues addressed in the Supreme Court judgment, providing a comprehensive overview of the decisions made by the Court in each case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
