Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, PRAVEEN KUMAR
New India Assurance Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Krishna City Hospital Represented through Dr. Manoj Kumar Jayaswal Male – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. case introduction and dismissal basis (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments on limitation period and delivery of award (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. analysis of compliance with delivery provisions (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 16 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. substantive legal outcome based on findings (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT :
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the contesting respondent no.1 as also perused the records. This Court has been informed that respondent no.2 is not a necessary party and no notice need be served upon respondent no.2.
2. The present appeal has been preferred for setting aside the order dated 22.03.2024 passed by the learned District Judge, Patna in Miscellaneous (Arbitration) Case No.113 of 2022. By the impugned order, the learned court has been pleased to dismiss the miscellaneous case on the ground of its being barred by limitation.
3. It appears on perusal of the records that being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the arbitral award dated 25.04.2022, the present appellant presented a Miscellaneous (Arbitration) Case under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 199
The reckoning point for filing an application for setting aside an arbitral award is the date of receipt of the signed copy, not merely the signing, with strict requirements for delivery under the Ar....
The reckoning point for limitation under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act begins only upon the party receiving the signed copy of the arbitral award, not merely upon its delivery to an advocate.
The court established that non-compliance with the mandatory delivery of the arbitral award affects the limitation period for filing an application to set aside the award.
![Health Care, Medical & General Stores, ] Dadar, Mumbai Vs Amulya Investment, ] Through Proprietor Mr. Sameer G. Narvekar - 2025 Supreme(Bom) 98](https://supremetoday-s3.b-cdn.net/Bombay_1.png)
Effective service of an arbitral award must be made directly to the parties involved; service on an employee does not suffice to commence the limitation period.
The limitation period for challenging an arbitral award under Sections 31(5) and 34(3) of the Arbitration Act begins upon receipt of a signed copy, making timely receipt crucial for valid appeals.
Limitation for setting aside an arbitral award commences on receipt of a signed copy; photocopies satisfy statutory requirements under modern arbitration practices.
The necessity of delivering a signed copy of the arbitral award to each party to begin the running of the limitation period under Section 34 of the A&C Act.
The issue of stamping and executability of an Award should be determined at the execution stage, not under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The limitation period for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, commences only from the date the aggrieved party receives a signed copy of the aw....
Compliance with Sec. 31(5) of the Act of 1996 regarding the delivery of the arbitration award to each party is crucial in commencing the period of limitation for filing objections under Sec. 34(3) of....
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
