ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN, INDU MALHOTRA
Ved Prakash Mithal And Sons – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
ORDER
1. Having heard the learned counsel for both sides, a few facts first need to be stated.
2. In the present case, an Arbitral Award was delivered on 30.10.2015 and received by the respondent on 07.11.2015. An application to correct the said aforesaid Award was made by the respondent on 16.11.2015. We may add that a similar application to correct the Award was also made on behalf of the respondent on 20.11.2015. Both these applications were decided by the learned Arbitrator together and dismissed on 14.12.2015.
3. On 11.03.2016, objections and application objecting to the Award was filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by the respondent. The only question that arises is whether the aforesaid Section 34 application could be said to be within the time mentioned in Section 34(3) of the Act.
4. The learned Additional District Judge, by order dated 30.05.2017, found that the application was time-barred, reasoning that the application should have been made on and from the first date as, in fact, there was no correction made to the Award.
5. The respondent preferred an appeal before the High Court, whereby the learn
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.