Glen Industries Private Limited v. Oriental Insurance Company Limited
Court – Calcutta High Court
Citation – AP-COM/540/2025
Date – 12.08.2025
The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court has held that the proceedings between Expiry of Arbitrator’s Mandate and its Extension are not Void if Mandate is Extended.
The Court held,
“13. The legislative intent was that an arbitral proceeding should continue even if the mandate terminates and an application for extension is pending before a Court. This is in consonance with the object behind the said Act, i.e., to ensure speedy disposal of disputes. Further, legislative intent was to validate the proceedings before the arbitrator by order of court, on an application for extension. The legislature intended that no legal vacuum or break in the arbitrator’s jurisdiction between expiry and extension should exist and the mandate should be revived from the date of expiry. The proceeding would be deemed to be within jurisdiction.
14. The law does not make it compulsory that an application must be filed pre-expiry or that the mandate should be extended pre-expiry. The law allows flexibility, so that, legitimate delays do not frustrate arbitration. However, the mandate would not revive automatically and the proceedings become valid only upon Court’s order of extension. Thus, any proceeding after the expiry of the mandate would be without jurisdiction, till such time the Court formally extends the mandate by an order. Once the order is passed, the proceedings get validated. Thus, an order of extension of the mandate by Court, grants retrospective continuity to the mandate of the arbitrator.”
— Team AMLEGALS
Please reach out to us at rohit.lalwani@amlegals.com in case of any query.
Navigation
Practice Areas
© 2020-21 AMLEGALS A Corporate Law Firm in India for IBC, GST, Arbitration, Data Protection, Contract, Due Diligence, Corporate Laws, IPR, White Collar Crime, Litigation & Startup Advisory, Legal Advisory.
