Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- ABDUL QUDDHOSE
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. This Court is also satisfied with the reasons contained in the affidavit filed in support of this application as sufficient cause has been shown by the applicant for seeking extension of time. Accordingly, this application is allowed as prayed for by granting extension of…
Judgment
A. No.2556 of 2025THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 10.06.2025CORAM:THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE A. No.2556 of 2025 Same Deutz-Fahr India Private LimitedRepresented by Authorised Signatory Mr.P.RameshNo.72/72M/73-77, SIPCOT Industrial Complex, Ranipet – 632 403, Tamil Nadu. ...Applicant vsMr.Sonyabapu Narayan Nawale...RespondentPRAYERTo extend the mandate for passing the Award by the Ld.Arbitral Tribunal for a further period of 6 months from 21.06.2025, until 21.12.2025.For Applicant : Mr.G.Kalyan Chand JhabakhFor Respondent : M/s.Madhuri Negi- - - - - 1/3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis A. No.2556 of 2025ORDERThis application has been filed under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking to extend the time for passing the Award by the Arbitral Tribunal for a further period of 6 months from 21.06.2025 till 21.12.2025.
Ms.Madhuri Negi, learned counsel for the respondent, appearing through video-conferencing, has stated that she has no objection for allowing this application.
This Court is also satisfied with the reasons contained in the affidavit filed in support of this application as sufficient cause has been shown by the applicant for seeking extension of time. Accordingly, this application is allowed as prayed for by granting extension of time for the Arbitral Tribunal to pronounce the Arbitral award for another period of six months from 21.06.2025 till 21.12.2025.10.06.2025kak2/3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis A. No.2556 of 2025ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.kakA. No.2556 of 202510.06.20253/3
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.