**Delhi High Court Holds 2019 Amendment to Section 29A of A&C Act to be Procedural, Applicable to Pending Arbitrations**
– The High Court of Delhi has ruled that the 2019 Amendment to Section 29A of the A&C Act is procedural in nature and applies to all arbitrations that were pending on the date of its coming into force.
– The amendment changed the time limit for rendering an award, which was previously calculated from the date of the arbitrator entering reference, but is now calculated from the date of completion of proceedings.
– The court extended the time period for rendering an arbitration award in a specific case due to the death of two arbitrators, recusal by the third arbitrator, and the delay caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.
**Facts:**
– The parties involved in the case had entered into a lease agreement that included an arbitration clause.
– A dispute arose when the respondent failed to pay the rental amounts, leading to termination notices and the sealing of the premises by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD).
– The petitioner invoked the arbitration clause on 14.12.2018 and initiated arbitration proceedings.
– However, both the appointed arbitrators passed away, causing delays in the proceedings.
– The 2019 amendment to the A&C Act changed the time limit for rendering an award, and the Supreme Court excluded the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 from the limitation period.
– The petitioner sought an extension of time for rendering an award, arguing that the delay was due to the unfortunate demise of the arbitrators and the recusal of the third arbitrator.
– The respondent argued against the extension of time, claiming that the 2019 amendment was not applicable to their case and that the mandate of the arbitrator had already terminated.
**Analysis by the Court:**
– The court determined that the 2019 amendment to Section 29A of the Act was procedural in nature and applied retrospectively to all pending arbitrations.
– Considering the completion of pleadings on 29.08.2019, the court held that the arbitrator should have delivered the award within 12 months from that date, excluding the time period due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
– The court acknowledged a marginal delay of 14 days in the rendering of the award but attributed it to the exceptional circumstances of the death of the arbitrators and the recusal of the third arbitrator.
– The petitioner had filed the petition within the period of limitation, and the court deemed their actions cautious.
– Consequently, the court allowed the petition and extended the period of limitation until the date on which the award was rendered.
**Case Details:**
– Case Name: Harkirat Singh Sodhi v. Oram Foods Pvt Ltd
– Case Number: OMP(MISC)(COMM) 186 of 2021
– Date of Judgment: 28.06.2023
– Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. Chaand Chopra with Mr. Siddharth Shekhar and Mr. Adwaith Sreekumar, Advocates
– Counsel for the Respondent: Ms. Ripu Adlakha, Advocate for R1 and 2, Ms. Deepti Kathpalia & Ms. Aksa Thomas, Advocates for R3.
– [Click Here To Read/Download Judgment](https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/judgement-12-479215.pdf)
Follow DelhiBreakings on Google News
Superfast News Coverage by DelhiBreakings.com team.
For Superfast national news and Delhi Breaking Stories visit us daily at https://delhibreakings.com
