Back
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
R. K. Transport Company – Appellant
Versus
Bharat Aluminum Company Ltd. (BALCO) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. It is just as necessary to follow a precedent as it is to make a precedent.
3. The present appeal arises out of an order of the Chhattisgarh High Court dated 27.09.2024 by which it allowed the respondent’s appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996,1[Hereinafter “ACA”.] and held the respondent’s application under Section 34 as being filed within the limitation period.
4. The short facts necessary for adjudication are as follows. The parties entered into a contract on 01.04.2002 for bauxite mining and delivery. Pursuant to disputes arising on payments under the contract, the matter was referred to arbitration, resulting in an arbitral award of Rs. 51,33,40,100 dated 09.04.2022 in favour of the appellant. It is undisputed that the award was signed and delivered to the respondent on this very day. The respondent filed an application to set aside the award under Section 34 on 11.07.2022, along with an application for stay of the award. The Trial Court, on 13.07.2022, passed an ex-parte order that the Section 34 application was within limitation as the 3-month period expired on 09.07.2022, which was a
Setting aside arbitral award – Period of limitation – Section 12(1) of Limitation Act, 1963 will apply.
The application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act was dismissed as barred by limitation since filed after the three-month period following the award, with no eligibility for an extension under ....
The limitation for setting aside an arbitral award begins from the date of receipt of the award, not from the rejection of an application under S.33.
Limitation Act shall apply to arbitrations as it applies to proceedings in Court.
Statutory limitations under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act are strict; applications for setting aside arbitral awards cannot be entertained if filed beyond the designated timeframe.
The court emphasized the peremptory language of section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the requirement for sufficient cause to condone any delay in filing the application.
The prescribed period for filing an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is three months, and the 30-day extension does not constitute part of this period.
The period of limitation under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act should exclude non-working days, allowing for sufficient cause extension beyond three months.
The limitation period for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is strict and non-extendable, emphasizing the need for timely recourse to mai....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
