2025:HHC:19144 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Arb. Case No.795 of 2024 Decided on: 20.06.2025 Surinder Pal ...Petitioner Versus Union of India & others ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioners: Mr. Parikshit Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Shiv Pal Minhans, Senior Panel Counsel, for respondent No.1. Ms. Sneh Bhimta, Advocate, vice Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Mr. Amandeep Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.3 and 4. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (oral) By way of this application, a prayer has been made to extend the period of mandate of Arbitrator in Arbitration Case No. 135 of 2017. 2. It is averred that the respondents had got the matter adjourned before the Arbitrator many times for filing reply. It is also averred that due to Covid-19 pandemic the proceedings could not be effectively undertaken by the Arbitrator for considerable period of time. The Arbitrator ultimately vide order 2 dated 02.08.2023 kept the proceedings in abeyance on the ground that his mandate had expired in terms of the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 3. Reply has been filed on behalf of respondent No.1. Factual aspect could be denied by the respondents. Evidently, a lot of time elapsed and was wasted due to the condition prevalent consequent to Covid-19 Pandemic. It also appears that due to said reason a huge pendency of arbitration cases got accumulated before the Arbitrator. In such circumstances, none of the parties or Arbitrator can be faulted for the delay caused in final adjudication of the matter. 4. Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the instant petition is allowed and the mandate of the learned Arbitrator to conclude the proceedings is extended by six months from the date of passing of this order. Since, the proceedings in the arbitration have been delayed considerably, it will be open for NHAI to agitate its rights in respect of payment of interest during the pendency of arbitral proceedings before the Arbitrator. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Satyen Vaidya ) Judge 20th June, 2025 (vt)