Calcutta High Court
AP-COM/473/2026 of M/S. ZAMIL STEEL BUILDINGS INDIA PVT. LTD. Vs M/S. JKS INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED on 7 September 2026
SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA COMMERCIAL DIVISION ORIGINAL SIDE AP-COM/473/2026 M/S. ZAMIL STEEL BUILDINGS INDIA PVT. LTD. VS M/S. JKS INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH Date : 7th September, 2026. Appearance:- Mr. Mrinal Beri, Adv. …for
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
OC- 4 ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA COMMERCIAL DIVISION ORIGINAL SIDE
AP-COM/473/2026 M/S. ZAMIL STEEL BUILDINGS INDIA PVT. LTD. VS M/S. JKS INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED
BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH Date : 7th September, 2026. Appearance:- Mr. Mrinal Beri, Adv. …for petitioner. Mr. Soumava Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Subhajit Seth, Adv. …for respondent.
The Court: - The petitioner has sought the extension of the mandate of the arbitral tribunal. Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits that the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal ought not to be extended, inasmuch as the learned Arbitrator has not conducted any proceedings for a period exceeding one year. The said contention is refuted by learned Counsel for the Petitioner, who submits that the present arbitral proceedings arise out of an agreement which shares commonality with the agreement underlying the proceedings in AP (Com)/471/2026, and that the said connected proceedings have, in fact, been recorded by the learned Arbitrator in the minutes of the meeting as constituting proceedings common to both matters. It is accordingly submitted that the learned Arbitrator has, in substance, conducted the arbitral proceedings in the present matter through the proceedings undertaken in AP(Com)/471/2026, and that the absence of separately
2
recorded sittings in the present matter does not amount to inaction on the part of the learned Arbitrator. Having considered the said submissions, this Court finds that the contention raised on behalf of the Respondent does not survive scrutiny. No delay in the conduct of the arbitral proceedings can be attributed to the learned Arbitrator. The extension of the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal is accordingly warranted, and the mandate is extended for a further period of six months. The learned sole arbitrator is requested to make all reasonable endeavours to conclude the arbitral proceedings and publish the arbitral award within the extended time period. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition stands disposed of.
(GAURANG KANTH, J.)
R. D. Barua