VALMIKI J.MEHTA
SATENDER KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI – Respondent
VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J
1. Whether time barred claims or claims which are barred by limitation, can be said to be live claims, which can be referred to arbitration, is the issue which calls for decision in the present cases. It is not disputed by either of the parties that the period of limitation for filing of a petition is three years from when the cause of action arises. The moot question however is, when can the cause of action be said to have arisen for the purpose of limitation to have commenced. Since the facts of the two cases are more or less similar, reference is being made only to the facts of the Arb. P. No.253/09 for the purpose of discussion.
2. The two Articles of the Limitation Act 1963 which are relevant in this regard are Articles 18 and 137 and the said Articles read as under:-
18. For the price of work done by the Plaintiff for the defendant at his Three years When the work is request, where no time has been done. fixed for payment.
137.Any other application for which No period of limitation is provided Three years When the right to apply elsewhere in this division accrues.
3. Accruing of cause of action, necessarily will vary with the facts
1. Pandit Constructions Company v. DDA
3. Major (Retd.) Inder Singh Rekhi v. Delhi Development Authority
4. Union of India v. L.K. Ahuja and Co.
5. J.C Budhraja v. Chairman Orissa Mining Corporation Limited
6. Progressive Construction Limited v. National Hydroelectric Power Corp. Ltd.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.