110 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA M/s Apollo International Haryana Prathmik Shiksha Pariyojna Parishad CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Sumit Puri, Advocate for the petitioner. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA The petition has been filed seeking a Additional District Judge, Panchkula, to pass final order on the application filed by the petitioner under Section 29A(4) and (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Annexure P proceedings. 2. It is Arbitrator to settle The time to pass the award expired on 28.02.2023. Annexure P-2, for extension of time moved Judge, Panchkula arguments were heard by the Court on 20.09.2024 pronounced so far which the case has been adjourned manner the arbitration proceedings IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-2733-2025 Date of Decision :06.05.2025 Apollo International Versus Haryana Prathmik Shiksha Pariyojna Parishad HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Mr. Sumit Puri, Advocate for the petitioner. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL) The petition has been filed seeking a Additional District Judge, Panchkula, to pass final order on the application filed by the petitioner under Section 29A(4) and (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Annexure P-2, for extension of time of arbitral It is, inter alia, contended that parties Arbitrator to settle the disputes arising out of agreement dated 31.03.2011. he time to pass the award expired on 28.02.2023. for extension of time moved before learned Judge, Panchkula, has not been decided despite lapse of about two years. Final arguments were heard by the Court on 20.09.2024 so far. This is apparent from zimni order which the case has been adjourned to 08.05.2025 a arbitration proceedings are being delayed unnecessarily IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Date of Decision :06.05.2025 …Petitioner Versus ….Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Mr. Sumit Puri, Advocate for the petitioner. The petition has been filed seeking a direction to learned Additional District Judge, Panchkula, to pass final order on the application filed by the petitioner under Section 29A(4) and (5) of the Arbitration and for extension of time of arbitral contended that parties appeared before the disputes arising out of agreement dated 31.03.2011. he time to pass the award expired on 28.02.2023. However, the application, before learned Additional District has not been decided despite lapse of about two years. Final arguments were heard by the Court on 20.09.2024, but the order has not been apparent from zimni order, dated 24.04.2025, vide to 08.05.2025 awaiting clarifications. In this are being delayed unnecessarily. learned Additional District Judge, Panchkula, to pass final order on the application filed by the petitioner under Section 29A(4) and (5) of the Arbitration and for extension of time of arbitral the disputes arising out of agreement dated 31.03.2011. However, the application, District has not been decided despite lapse of about two years. Final but the order has not been vide In this PUSHPINDER SAINI 2025.05.08 14:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-2733-2025 3. Keeping in view the nature of direction bei prejudicial to the respondent, notice of the petition has not been issued. 4. In view of the fact that arbitral proceedings have been application for extension of time not being decided by learned District Judge, i extension of time, weeks from today. 5. Disposed of. May 06, 2025 ps -2- Keeping in view the nature of direction bei prejudicial to the respondent, notice of the petition has not been issued. In view of the facts aforementioned proceedings have been unduly d application for extension of time not being decided by learned District Judge, it is deemed appropriate to direct that the application extension of time, bearing CM no.97 of 2023, from today. Disposed of. May 06, 2025 Whether speaking/ reasoned Whether reportable Keeping in view the nature of direction being issued which is not prejudicial to the respondent, notice of the petition has not been issued. aforementioned, and keeping in view the fact duly delayed on account of the application for extension of time not being decided by learned Additional t is deemed appropriate to direct that the application for be finally decided within four (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No ng issued which is not and keeping in view the fact elayed on account of the Additional for decided within four PUSHPINDER SAINI 2025.05.08 14:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document