Authority: Madras High Court, Justice K. Kumaresh Babu

Order Date: 31 July 2026

Case Overview

  • Applicants: Flavorite Technologies Pvt Ltd (formerly Flavorite PPM Technologies Pvt Ltd) and Heat and Control (South Asia) Private Limited.
  • Respondents: Mr. Raman Dhoot, Mrs. Renu Dhoot (deceased) represented by Mr. Raghav Dhoot and Ms. Radhika Dhoot.
  • The dispute has been referred to arbitration; the sole arbitrator’s original mandate was extended by this Court on 25 September 2025 for three months after substituting the arbitrator.
  • The applicants filed an application under Section 27 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act in 2025; the Court held that the sole arbitrator possessed the power to decide such matters and directed the parties to approach the arbitrator.
  • The arbitrator, on 3 December 2025, ordered the respondents to produce certain documents and allowed the applicants to seek Court assistance if needed.
  • The respondents challenged this arbitrator order in CRP No.1448 of 2026; the challenge was dismissed by this Court on 13 March 2026.
  • Subsequent applications by the applicants were partially allowed on 7 April 2026 (A.Nos.586 & 587 of 2026) and two other applications (A.Nos.591 & 592 of 2026) were rejected.
  • The three‑month mandate granted on 25 September 2025 expired in February 2026, prompting the present application for a further twelve‑month extension.
  • Respondent counsel argued that the delay was caused solely by the applicants, who had repeatedly filed applications to keep the arbitrator’s mandate alive.
  • The Court observed that the arbitration proceedings, initiated in 2021, were still at the stage of issue framing and that the parties had only completed pleadings.

Final Outcome

  • The Court declined to grant the requested twelve‑month extension but extended the arbitrator’s mandate for nine (9) months from the date of receipt of a certified true copy of this order.
  • No order as to costs was made; however, the Court directed that if any party attempts to further delay the proceedings, the arbitrator may impose costs on that party.
  • The arbitrator is instructed to endeavour to complete the arbitration within the nine‑month period.

Topics: Arbitration, Court Order