OCD-7 ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE (Commercial Division) AP-COM/35/2026 KERALA STATE ELECTRONICS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED VS BIDHANNAGAR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH Date : 28th January, 2026. Appearance Mr. Kushal Chatterjee, Adv. Mr. Subhasish Mitra, Adv. Mr. Arijit Mahinder, Adv. Mr. Shibjit Mitra, Adv. ...for the petitioner Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay, Adv. Mr. Arka Kr. Nag, Adv. ...for the respondent The Court: The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking extension of the mandate of the arbitral tribunal for conclusion of the arbitral proceedings and publication of the arbitral award. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that by an order dated 15th March, 2022, this Hon’ble Court appointed a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. During the said period, the learned sole arbitrator had conducted several sittings, recorded the evidence of both parties and commenced the final argument. It is further submitted that owing to ill-health, the learned sole arbitrator expressed his inability to continue with the arbitral proceedings. Consequently, the petitioner approached this Hon’ble Court and by an order 2 dated 15th May, 2024, a new arbitrator was appointed. However, due to procedural and logistic reasons, the arbitral records could be transmitted to the newly appointed arbitrator only on 26th July, 2025. Upon receipt of the records, the proceedings resumed, final arguments were concluded and the parties were directed to file written submissions. In the interregnum, the mandate of the arbitral tribunal expired. In view of the substitution of the arbitrator and the circumstances stated above, the petitioner seeks extension of the mandate of the arbitral tribunal for the purposes of conclusion of the proceedings and publication of the arbitral award. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent states that he has no objection to the extension of the mandate of the arbitral tribunal. Upon consideration of the submissions of both the parties and the materials placed on record, this Court is satisfied that there has been no undue or unwarranted delay on the part of the learned sole arbitrator in conducting the arbitral proceedings. Having regard to the advanced stage of the arbitral proceedings and in the interest of justice, the mandate of the arbitral tribunal is extended further for a period of four months from today. The learned sole arbitrator is requested to make all reasonable endeavours to conclude the arbitral proceedings and publish the arbitral award within the extended time period. With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of. (GAURANG KANTH, J.) S. A. AR (C R)