Innov8 Workspaces India Limited v. Dipika Silks Mills Private Limited & Anr.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
Adv. Adihi Shrivastava (through Video-Conferencing) i/b DMD Advocates, for the Petitioner. Adv. Mansi Kaku, for Respondents.
CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 23, 2026
ORDER :
This is a Petition under Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking an extension of mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal, which is scheduled to be expired on March 18, 2026.
Today, when the matter is called out, Learned Counsel for the parties jointly request for an extension of mandate by a period of one year, bearing in mind the stage at which the arbitral proceedings are placed.
In these circumstances, taking into account the stage at Chaitanya February 23, 2026 which the Arbitral proceedings are placed, this Petition is finally disposed of extending the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal for a period of 12 months i.e. until February 28, 2027.
All actions required to be taken pursuant to this order shall be taken upon receipt of a downloaded copy as available on this Court’s website. [ SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.] Chaitanya February 23, 2026
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 23 Feb 2026. The bench was SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.