Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
ANU SIVARAMAN, RAJESH RAI K.
Hubli Electricity Supply Company Limited, Represented By Its Superintending Engineer, Project Monitoring Cell (SEPMC) – Appellant
Versus
Spml Infra Limited, (Formerly Subhash Projects And Marketing Ltd.) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANU SIVARAMAN, j.
1. The only question which requires a consideration in this appeal is:-
Whether this appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('Arbitration Act' for short) filed with an application to condone the delay of 126 days in filing the same is liable to be considered on merits or not?
2. This Commercial Appeal is filed under Section 13 (1-A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('Arbitration Act' for short) against the judgment dated 29.11.2021 passed by the LXXXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-83) ('Commercial Court' for short) in COM.AS.No.30 of 2014.
3. Heard Shri. S. Sriranga, learned senior counsel as instructed by Smt. Sumana Naganand and Smt. Ashwini N. Ravindra, learned Advocates appearing for the appellant and Shri. Dhananjay Joshi, learned senior counsel as instructed by Shri. Sharath Chandra J, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
4. The facts of the case as pleaded in the appeal are as follows:-
Appellant is a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and is a deemed licensee under the Electricity Act, 2003. Respond
The court emphasized that the law of limitation binds all parties, and mere bureaucratic delays are insufficient for condoning delays in filing appeals.
The court may condone delays in filing appeals where sufficient cause is shown, including circumstances beyond a party's control, advocated particularly in light of unprecedented events like a pandem....
The law of limitation applies equally to all parties, including the Government, and a lack of diligence in filing appeals can result in rejection of delay condonation applications.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the doctrine of condonation of delay should be applied judiciously, taking into account the circumstances and the impact of external factors s....
The court emphasized that delay in filing appeals under the Arbitration Act must be justified by sufficient cause, with negligence being insufficient for condonation.
The court established that the limitation period for appeals under the Arbitration Act is 60 days as per the Commercial Courts Act, but delays can be condoned based on sufficient cause, including rel....
The court emphasized that appeals under the Arbitration Act must adhere to strict timelines, and administrative delays do not constitute sufficient cause for condonation of delay.
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
