M/s Continental Construction Projects Limited Vs. M/s Beas Valley Power Corporation Limited. OMP No.1068 of 2025 in Arb. Case No.572 of 2023. Item No. (D-18) 29.08.2025 Present: Mr. Hitender Thakur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Bhogal, Senior Advocate with Ms. Srishti Verma, Advocate, for the respondent. OMP No.1068 of 2025. The present application has been filed under Section 29(A) (4) & (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1966 seeking extension of mandate of the Sole Arbitrator for passing the arbitral Award in Arbitration Case No.572 of 2023. A perusal of the paper-book would go on to show that the appointment was made on 22.09.2023 in two cases i.e. Arbitration Case No.572 of 2023 & Arbitration Case No.573 of 2023 titled M/s Continental Construction Projects Limited Vs. M/s Beas Valley Power Corporation Limited and Justice V. Ramasubramanian, former Judge of the Supreme Court was appointed as the Arbitrator in both cases. 2. In the application, the details as such have been given of the dispute, which has been festering, since the work was granted on 20th July, 2008. The earlier Arbitrator had been appointed on 22.05.2017 and had recused, therefore, an alternate Arbitrator has been appointed. Thus, it is apparent that the parties had taken recourse to the arbitration proceedings on account of the Clause provided for the same. 3. In the reply filed by the respondent today, it has now been brought to notice of this Court that though the issues were framed way-back on 17.02.2018 but the various applications have been filed including applications for release of Bank Guarantees and for liberty to furnish fresh evidence on the ground of the retirement of some of the officials. The termination of the proceedings was done on 14.10.2018 and a fresh Arbitrator was appointed namely-Anil K. Dutta and COVID period was intervening thereafter. Apparently, on account of the fact that he had remained employee of the respondent, therefore, in view of the amendment, the fresh application was filed for appointment of Arbitrator as noticed above. 4. In such circumstances, once the matter is at the stage of cross-examination and in similar circumstances, an application has been allowed in Arbitration Case No.573 of 2023, whereby the same Learned Arbitrator was appointed, therefore, the present application is allowed and the mandate of the Arbitrator is extended. 5. Keeping in view the nature of dispute as such and the issues which have been raised, this Court deems it fit to extend the mandate of the Arbitrator till 30.06.2026. 6. The application stands disposed off accordingly. (G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice 29th August, 2025 (munish thakur)