Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SHAMPA SARKAR
J.D. Electrical Products Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Purbachal Udyog – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for relief regarding non-enforceability of an award. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments on the requirement of proper service of the arbitral award. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 9) |
| 3. details of the award and consequences of its alleged non-service. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. arguments supporting the sufficiency of the certified copy service. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. importance of compliance with delivery mandates in arbitration. (Para 19 , 20 , 23) |
| 6. procedural context and significance of previous court actions. (Para 21 , 22) |
| 7. legal context on execution and service requirements under arbitration law. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 8. interpretation of service rules and their applications. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 9. judicial interpretations on presumptions of service. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 10. conclusion on the application’s dismissal and the maintainability of the execution case. (Para 44 , 46) |
JUDGMENT :
Shampa Sarkar, J.
1. GA 1 of 2022 is an application under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code. The award debtor filed the said application for the following reliefs:-
“a) To declare that the purported Award dated 10.11.2020 is non-est and not en
The court confirmed that compliance with service requirements for an arbitral award can be established through proper postal dispatch and delivery confirmation under Section 31(5) of the Arbitration ....
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....
![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 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 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.
The limitation period for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act starts from the date of receipt of the award, not from knowledge of later proceedings.
Limitation period for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act commences from the date of receipt of the signed award, as mandated by Section 31(5), and cannot be extende....
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....
Execution of an arbitral award requires compliance with the 90-day limitation under Section 34; execution petitions filed before this period are impermissible.
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....
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
