Legal Minute India
Delhi High Court

TATA CAPITAL LIMITED TRANSFEREE OF TATA CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED v. M/S AADINATH STEEL AND ORS

Court
Delhi High Court
Case number
O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) - 733/2026
Date of judgment
9 October 2026
Petitioner / Appellant
TATA CAPITAL LIMITED TRANSFEREE OF TATA CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED
Respondent
M/S AADINATH STEEL AND ORS
CNR
DLHC010440722026
Download PDFView on court website
The PDF is the copy published on the court's website, unchanged. It is not a certified copy. The text below is extracted automatically and may contain errors; the PDF is the authoritative version.

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 733/2026 Page 1 of 2

$~56

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010440722026 + O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 733/2026 & I.A. 25491/2026 TATA CAPITAL LIMITED TRANSFEREE OF TATA CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanidhya Sonthali a, Ms.

Ekta Bhasin, Mr. R. Sudhinder

and Mr. Anand Amit, Advs.

versus

M/S AADINATH STEEL AND ORS .....Respondents Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA

ORDER(ORAL)

% 09.10.2026

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 29A(4) read with Section 29A(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 1 seeking extension of the mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator by a further period of three months and regularisation of the period from 02.07.2026 until the date of this order.

2. The pleadings in the arbitration stood completed on 02.07.2025.

final arguments were concluded on 27.03.2026, and both parties thereafter filed their written submissions. The matter is stated to be reserved for pronouncement of the award.

3. Service is sufficient in this matter. None appears on behalf of the Respondents, nor have any objections been filed on their behalf.

1 “Act” hereinafter

O.M.P.(MISC.)(COMM.) 733/2026 Page 2 of 2

4. Having regard to the stage of the arbitral proceedings, the fact that the matter is stated to be reserved for pron ouncement of the award, and the limited extension sought, this Court is satisfied that sufficient cause has been made out for extending the mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator.

5. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator is extended by a further period of three months from the date of this order.

6. The period from 02.07.2026 until the date of this order also stands regularised.

7. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J

OCTOBER 9, 2026/gunn