MULTIPLE ARBITRATIONS CAN EXIST IF THE CAUSE OF ACTION CONTINUES, HOWEVER IT MAY RESULT IN DELAY OF PROCEEDINGS: DELHI HIGH COURT A concession agreement was executed between Panipat Jalandhar NH-1 Tollway Private Limited and National Highway Authority of India for or Six-Laning of Panipat-Jalandhar Section of NH-1 in the State of Haryana and Punjab. A dispute regarding the length of the road so constructed arose in 2013 and the parties failed to resolve the dispute and the petitioner invoked arbitration under clause 44.3 of the concession agreement. In this case the matter was already ongoing before two Arbitration Tribunals and the Petitioner was again seeking appointment of third Arbitral Tribunal for adjudication of disputes relating to a project for which second arbitral tribunal has already been constituted and upon which the respondent was of the opinion that this would lead to multiplicity of proceedings which is wholly unwarranted and unsustainable. The Hon’ble Court held that objections raised by the petitioner with regard to nomination and appointment of Justice (Retd.) G.P. Mathur as respondent’s Arbitrator is baseless and liable to be rejected. The Court observed that proceedings before the second arbitral tribunal are in progress, however, not yet complete and if the disputes raised in the present petition are referred to the second arbitral tribunal, it may result in delay of proceedings before the second arbitral tribunal. Reddy and Reddy Law Firm comprises experienced and resourceful advocates and lawyers who advise and represent clients in all dispute resolution forums. The firm also represents clients in arbitral proceedings involving complex commercial disputes regarding various subject matters including insurance law, consumer law, government contracts, etc.