Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.NAGAPRASANNA
Ashish K. Philip Kalluparambli Philip S/o Philip K.P – Appellant
Versus
Caledon Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
ORDER :
M.NAGAPRASANNA, J.
Heard Shri Vittal B.R., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri Suraj Sampath, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayers:
"a. Set aside the order dated 09.01.2025 on IA NO 1 passed by the Hon'ble X Addl District and Session Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore in Ex No COM EX 198/2024 produced at Annexure A.
b. Set aside the order dated 26.03.2025 on IA NO.6 passed by the Hon'ble X Addl District and Session Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore in Ex No COM EX 198/2024 produced at Annexure B.
c. Set aside the order dated 3.05.2025 fixing the spot sale on 20.6.2025 passed by the Hon'ble X Addl District and Session Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore in Ex No COM EX 198/2024 produced at Annexure C.
d. Pass such other orders/reliefs as this Hon'ble court deems fit, in the interest of justice."
3. The petitioner suffers an award at the hands of the Arbitrator. This is challenged by the petitioner before the jurisdictional Court, in Punjab, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('the Act' for short) in Misc.DJ.No.126/2024.
4. The petitione
The court held that an arbitral award passed beyond statutory timelines may still be valid if the parties impliedly consented to extension, while dual legal challenges to the same award are impermiss....
The absence of a condonation application renders a challenge to an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act invalid if filed beyond the statutory limitation period.
Arbitral Award – Limitation – S. 34(3) specifically states that an application for setting aside may not be made after three months have lapsed from date of which party making an application had rece....
The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to the statutory provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, particularly regarding the filing of Section 34 applications during the pendency o....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the arbitrator's duty to inform the claimant of their failure to communicate their claim and to provide an opportunity to show sufficient cause, an....
The period for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act cannot be extended beyond the prescribed period, as the Act is a self-contained special law and t....
Point of Law : Even if the period of delay is considered to be of 21 days. Since Section 34(3) of the Act, 1996 bars condonation of delay beyond the period of 30 days after the period of 3 months is ....
The scope for judicial intervention in arbitral awards is strictly limited to clear violations of public policy or patent illegality; mere procedural errors or delays do not warrant the award's setti....
The limitation period for setting aside an arbitral award starts from the disposal of a request under Section 33, excluding the time taken for communication of that decision.
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
