Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN
In the Matter BetweenExecutive Engineer, National Highway Division – Appellant
Versus
Sanjay Shankar Surve – Respondent
JUDGEMENT :
Context and Background:
1. Interim Application No.12074 of 2024 is an Application seeking condonation of delay in filing of the Arbitration Appeal (L) No. 8703 of 2024 (“Arbitration Appeal”), filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Arbitration Act”).
2. The Arbitration Appeal impugns a Judgment and Order dated April 19, 2023 passed by the District Judge-1, Ratnagiri under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, which upheld an arbitral award enhancing the compensation amount in respect of land acquisition for construction of a national highway.
3. Ms. Kajal Gupta, Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the copy of the order was received on May 9, 2023 and the limitation period had expired on August 10, 2023. Learned Counsel further submits that the Appeal was e-filed on December 11, 2023, which led to an electronic filing number ending with “2023” being assigned. Learned Counsel would submit that the delay is just 123 days, whereas the Registry has wrongly stated that the delay is of 164 days. For the reasons set out in the Interim Application, she seeks condonation of delay.
Reasons Pleaded to Condone Delay:
4. The reasons set out in the App
Misleading submissions in applications for condonation of delay undermine credibility, leading to dismissal of such applications.
The court established that delays in appeals under the Arbitration Act are to be strictly limited, with condonation only in exceptional circumstances where compelling reasons are provided.
Delay beyond 120 days (90+30) in Section 34 petitions or corresponding appeals under Section 37 of Arbitration Act not condonable via Limitation Act Section 5; negligence, inaction, lack of bonafides....
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 emphasized that appeals under the Arbitration Act must adhere to strict timelines, and administrative delays do not constitute sufficient cause for condonation of delay.
Timely filing of appeals under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is crucial; bureaucratic delays are inadequate reasons for condoning significant delays.
The court emphasized the strict timelines prescribed in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and the Limitation Act, and held that delays beyond the statutory periods cannot be condoned.
The expression 'sufficient cause' for condonation of delay must be liberally interpreted to ensure substantial justice is done, as long as negligence in action or lack of bona fides cannot be imputed....
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
