Mandate Continues its Unbroken Run: High Court at Calcutta Upholds Extension of Arbitral Tribunal Mandate

In a significant ruling concerning arbitration law, the Hon’ble Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya of the Calcutta High Court has extended the mandate of an arbitral tribunal in the case of Praxair India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Steel Authority of India Ltd. The decision, marked by the case number A.P. COM 41 of 2024, was delivered on 22^nd February 2024.

The judgment revolved around the extension of the arbitral tribunal’s mandate under sections 29A(4) and (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the application of sections 5 and 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Court had to determine whether the arbitral tribunal’s mandate had irrevocably terminated before the application for its extension was filed and whether the delay in filing the application was condonable.

The dispute arose from the extension of the tribunal’s mandate which was initially extended by mutual consent until 14.07.2023. The petitioner filed for a further extension on 14.07.2023, which after a series of transfers, was ultimately rejected as non-maintainable by the Commercial Court at Asansol on 09.01.2024. The present application was filed in the High Court immediately thereafter.

The Court, applying sections 5 and 14 of the Limitation Act, found the delay in filing the application condonable. Justice Bhattacharya observed, “The mandate was prevented from tripping and falling by continuation of the proceedings,” emphasizing the uninterrupted continuity of the mandate. The Court rejected the respondent’s contention that the mandate first terminated on 14.07.2023 and then on 09.01.2024, asserting that the mandate did not terminate at any stage in this timeframe.

Regarding the jurisdictional challenge, the Court held that it was competent to extend the mandate, citing its prior role in appointing an arbitrator under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The Court stressed that section 29A is aimed at ensuring timely arbitration and should not be interpreted to cause unnecessary delays.

Decision: The application (AP COM 41 of 2024) was allowed, extending the mandate of the arbitral tribunal for three weeks from the date of the judgment. The court noted the readiness of the arbitral award as of 21.12.2023 and refused the prayer for stay.

Date of Decision: 22.02.2024

Praxair India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Steel Authority of India Ltd.