1 Serial No. 01 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Arb.P. No. 7 of 2025 Date of Decision: 07.10.2025 BSCPL Infrastructure Limited Office at 8-2-502/1/A, JIVI Towers, Road No. 7, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad Telangana – 500034 Rep. by Authorised Representative Shri. D. Srinivasa Rao S/o Dharamukkala Suryanarayana R/o 391, 2nd Floor, Sector 15. Part – 1 Gurgaon. Haryana – 122001 :::Petitioner -Vs- The Addl. Chief Engineer, P.W.D. (Roads) Western Zone, Meghalaya-794001 :::Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Chief Justice (Acting) Appearance: For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. K.Ch. Gautam, Adv. Ms. G.C. Marboh, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. A.S. Pandey, Adv. with Ms. R. Colney, Adv. Mr. A.M. Pala, Adv. 2025:MLHC:954 2 i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc.: ii) Whether approved for publication in press: Yes/No Oral: 1. This application under Section 29A (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, is a third application in the pending arbitral proceedings between the parties therein. 2. This Court in the first instance, by order dated 23.04.2024, in Arb. P. No. 2 of 2024, has extended the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal for a period of 1(one) year w.e.f. 04.04.2024, and in the second instance, as the proceedings could not be completed, by order dated 28.03.2025, passed in Arb. P. No. 1 of 2025, had extended the term for further period of 6(six) months w.e.f. 04.04.2025. 3. By the instant application, it has been submitted that after the reconstitution of the Arbitral Tribunal, consequent on the expiry of the petitioner’s nominee Arbitrator, Mr. Justice Devinder Gupta (Retd.), though the matter was listed for final rejoinder arguments, the same could not be concluded due to the voluminous records involved. As such, it has been prayed that an extension of the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal be given for a further period of 6(six) months w.e.f. 05.10.2025, to enable conclusion of the final arguments and for passing of the award. 2025:MLHC:954 3 4. The submissions of the petitioner are not refuted by the counsel for the respondent that the matter is at the stage of final rejoinder arguments and he has no objection if the prayer of the petitioner be allowed, but that the same should be the last extension. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, though this is the third application in the same arbitral proceedings, that extension has been sought, on examination of the matter, this Court is of the considered view that a further extension is necessary to conclude the final arguments and to make the award. 6. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of by ordering that the Arbitral Tribunal’s term shall stand extended for a further period of 6(six) months w.e.f. 05.10.2025. It is also further provided that no further extension will be allowed. 7. As ordered above, the instant petition stands allowed and is disposed of. Chief Justice (Acting) Meghalaya 07.10.2025 “D.Thabah-PS” 2025:MLHC:954 Digitally signed by DARIHUN THABAH Date: 2025.10.07 14:23:36 IST