BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD. v. WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED
AP-COM/702/2026 · 2026-08-31
Gaurang Kanth
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 37718 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 37718 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
OCD-9
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA COMMERCIAL DIVISION ORIGINAL SIDE
AP-COM/702/2026
BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD. VS WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED
BEFORE:
The Hon’ble JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH Date : 31st August, 2026. Appearance: Mr. Tauseef Ahmad Khan, Adv. Mr. Arindam Paul, Adv. Ms. Debarati Das, Adv. Ms. Eshika Nandy, Adv. …for the petitioner
Mr. Sujit Sankar Koley, Adv. Mr. Tathagata Deb, Adv. …for the respondent
The Court: Affidavit of service is taken on record. The petitioner has preferred the present petition under Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking extension of the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal for completion of the arbitral proceedings and publication of the arbitral award.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court vide order dated 24.06.2022 constituted the Arbitral Tribunal to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The pleadings were completed on 25.03.2023 and with the consent of the parties, the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal was extended further for a period of six months till 25.09.2024. Thereafter, this Court vide order dated 06.11.2024 extended the mandate of the Arbitral
2 Tribunal further for a period of 18 months which came to an end on
23.05.2026.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the Counsel for the respondent had expired during the course of the arbitral proceedings. Thus, there has been some delay caused due to the said demise.
Learned Counsel for the parties submit that the matter is at the stage of examination of respondent’s witness.
Learned Counsel 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 proceedings. Having regard to the advanced stage of the proceedings and in the interest of justice, the mandate of the learned sole Arbitrator is extended further for a period of one year 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.)
R.Bhar