DATA TECHNOSYS(ENGINEERS) PVT. LTD. vs RAIL VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED

Judgment text excerpt

$~50 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 17.03.2026 + O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 221/2026, I.A. 6577/2026 (For Exemption) & I.A. 6578/2026 (For Delay 100 days in re-filing the petition) DATA TECHNOSYS(ENGINEERS) PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Love Kumar Gupta and Ms. Saumya Pandey, Advocates. versus RAIL VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr. Udit Seth and Mr. Divyanshu Singh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR % JUDGEMENT (ORAL) HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. 1. The present Petition has been filed under Section 29A (4) and (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 19961 seeking extension of mandate or, substitution of the Sole Arbitrator appointed vide Order dated 17.04.2023 in ARB.P. 336/2023 seeking the following reliefs: “Allow the present petition for extending the mandate of the Ld. Sole Arbitrator appointed by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 17.04.2023 under Section 29A (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for a further period of six months for the 1 Act Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARVINDER KAUR O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 221/2026 Page 1 of 5 BHATIA Signing Date:20.03.2026 12:23:12 purpose of concluding the arbitral proceeding and consequent passing of the arbitral award; OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, b) That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass a necessary order for substituting the existing Ld. Arbitrator under Section 29A(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and direct the substitute Arbitrator appointed thereof to continue the proceedings from the current stage in accordance with law. c) Pass such other or further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf