Union Of India vs M/S Nar Bahadur Dahal
2021 Latest Caselaw 90 Sikkim

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 90 Sikkim
Judgement Date : 10 December, 2021

Sikkim High Court

Union Of India vs M/S Nar Bahadur Dahal on 10 December, 2021

Bench: Shri Biswanath Somadder

                                                                       COURT NO.1
                        HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
                             Record of Proceedings



                               Arb.P. No. 03/2021


UNION OF INDIA                                          PETITIONER (S)
                                     VERSUS
M/S NAR BAHADUR DAHAL                                   RESPONDENT (S)


For Petitioner           :      MS. Sangita Pradhan, Asst. Solicitor General

For Respondent           :      Mr. Sajal Sharma, Advocate.



Date: 10/12/2021

CORAM :

      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWANATH SOMADDER, CHIEF JUSTICE
                              ...

                                   JUDGMENT

This arbitration petition has been filed by the Union of India

praying inter alia for extension of time till 31st December, 2021, to be

granted to the learned Arbitrator for making and publishing the arbitral

award. In connection with this arbitration petition, an interlocutory

application, being IA No.01of 2021, has been taken out by the

respondent, namely, M/s Nar Bahadur Dahal, wherein the respondent

has inter alia prayed for substitution of the Arbitrator by appointing an

Arbitrator, being a retired Judge of the Hon'ble High Court and to give

directions to the said Arbitrator to dispose of the arbitration

proceedings as expeditiously as possible.

2. In the facts of the instant case, we notice that the arbitral

tribunal was constituted on 28th June, 2018. The period of twelve

months from that date expired on 27th June, 2019. The parties, in

terms of the relevant provision of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,

1996, gave their consent for extension of time for making and

COURT NO.1 HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK Record of Proceedings

publishing of the arbitral award by another six months. The reasons

for not being able to conclude the hearing of the arbitration

proceedings, as stated in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the arbitration

petition, read as follows:-

"7. That the Ld. Arbitrator conducted hearings on different dates to adjudicate the disputes between the petitioner and the respondent. However, the proceedings could not be completed despite of the best efforts of the Ld. Arbitrator as well as the parties. Copies of the Sole Arbitrator's order dated 15th October 2018 and 31st May 2019 are filed herewith and Annexure-P5 & P6 respectively.

8. It is submitted that the Ld. Arbitrator, got transferred to a remote area at 23 BRTF, Daporijo, Upper Subansiri District, Arunanchal Pradesh from where he could not connect with the parties for the hearing in the Arbitration proceeding. In the meantime, due to outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic, nationwide lockdown was announced and due to the technical problem faced by the Ld. Arbitrator, proceedings could not be concluded within the period prescribed as stipulated under section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act."

3. This Court is not satisfied with the one of the reasons, as cited

hereinabove. It has been stated by the petitioner that the learned

Arbitrator got transferred to a remote area in Arunachal Pradesh from

where he cannot communicate with the parties for hearing of the

arbitration proceedings. Even the date of his transfer to Arunachal

Pradesh has not been stated - nor what he was doing between 31st

May, 2019 and the date of his transfer - anywhere in the pleadings. If

the learned Arbitrator was unable to discharge his duty, he ought to

have either recused or withdrawn himself from the arbitral proceedings

and his mandate would have automatically been terminated. However,

the learned Arbitrator did not do so, for reasons best known to him.

The other reason, which is more plausible, is with regard to the