Smt. Pratibha Singhal v. M/s S.n.g. Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., Having Its Registered Office At
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed
Provisions considered
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 s. 29A(4)(5)
Judgment
Operative part
Smt. Pratibha Singhal S/o Shri Ghanshyam Singhal, Aged About 68 Years, R/o Outside Of Surajpole Gate, Ganesh Bhawan, Before The New Anaaj Mandi, Jaipur, At Present Resides At 1St Floor, D-68, Near Police Memorial Jln Road, Jaipur 302004, Current Address 601, Askhat Roop Near Dadhich Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur ----Appellants Versus M/s S.n.g. Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., Having Its Registered Office At 707, Paris Point, Sawai Jaisingh Highway, Collectorate Circle, Banipark, Jaipur Through Its Director Shri Satya Narayan Gupta, Aged About 54 Years, R/o 1-E-19, Shiv Shakti Colony, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur Currently Residing At 364, Jems Colony Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302039 ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Gopal Singh Bareth For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA 28/05/2025 Order This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the order dated 07.05.2025 whereby the learned Commercial Court has extended the period of passing the award in view of Section 29A (4)(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. (2 of 2) [CMA-2382/2025] Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Commercial Court has committed serious illegality in extending the period for passing of the award. Counsel has further submitted that no sufficient reasons have been assigned by the learned Commercial Court to extend the period for passing of the award. We have heard counsel for the appellants and perused the order dated 07.05.2025. The learned Commercial Court while extending the period of passing the award i.e. 31.08.2025 has given the reasons for extending the period such like earlier the moratorium period was in existence due to COVID-19 pandemic and further given the reason that both the parties have taken time with regard to settling the dispute between them by way of compromise, however, the said compromise has failed. Therefore, the respondents filed the application for extending the period for passing of the award. In that view of the matter, we are satisfied with the order passed by the learned Commercial Court dated 07.05.2025 and in our considered view, no illegality has been committed by the Commercial Court in extending the period of passing the award up to 31.08.2025. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed. (ANAND SHARMA),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J NEERU /161
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — s. 29A(4)(5).
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.