Arbitration Act – Mandate of Arbitrator – Sections 29A(4) and (5) – Court has powers to extend mandate of Arbitrator and extend time retrospectively even after award was passed – Kerala High Court

On 6.5.2023, the Arbitral Award was passed without any extension of mandate. Respondent No.2 paid the due amount. However, Respondent no.1 filed section 34 petition before the Commercial Court challenging legality of Award passed after expiry of time mandate of Arbitrator.

Thereafter, applications have been filed that Arbitral Tribunal passed the award without noticing that the time stood expired on 1.3.2023 and therefore, extenion of time is required. Section 32 shows that the termination of mandate of arbitrator and termination of proceedings on a final arbitral award being passed are not absolute but subject to sections 33 and sub-section (4) of section 34 of the AA.  Therefore, the Court is denuded of its further powers to consider any application. The said termination can only be read subject to the powers of extension of the mandate under Section 29A(3) and (4) of the AA. In an appropriate case and if there is sufficient cause, the Court would be empowered to extend time for passing award even in a case where the award has already been passed.

HELD that the parties have agreed that the Court is competent to consider the application under Section 29A(4) of the AA. However, this can be done only before or after expiry of time but not after the award was passed. 

In number of cases, it is common experience the litigants and the stake holders faced the insurmountable vexed question of time limit mandate of the Arbitrator, lapse of time limit, extension of time for passing of Award or legality of Award passed after expiry of time limit.  To my mind, the Judgment of the Kerala High Court will provide solace and relief to the stake holders.

Judgment dated 20.3.2024 IA NO.2/2023 in AR No.52 of 2019 of RKEC Projects Limited Vs. The Cochin Port Trust and another