Back
VIPIN SANGHI, JASMEET SINGH
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Air India Ltd – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Vipin Sanghi, J. - The present appeal is directed against the order dated 27.09.2019 passed I.A. No. 13340/2019 in O.M.P. (COMM.) 400/2019 by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the said application preferred by the appellant/ petitioner to seek condonation of delay in filing the objection petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, on the ground that though the objection petition was initially preferred within the 120-day period of the receipt of the copy of the majority award by the petitioner on 11.04.2019, the same could not be considered as a valid filing due to several serious defects in the original filing itself which took place on 03.08.2019. Consequently, the objection petition also stands dismissed.
2. The impugned order takes note of the defects which were found in the initial filing, namely the absence of Vakalatnama, Court fees, impugned Award, requisite documents, signed & attested Statement of Truth and affidavits in support of the application.
3. The factual position taken note of in the impugned order is that the after the initial filing of the objection petition on 03.08.2019, the defects were, firstly, no
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a filing can be considered as 'Non-est' only if it is filed without any signatures of either the party or its authorised counsel, and that the....
The Court emphasized the importance of diligence in addressing procedural defects and allowed the condonation of delay based on the petitioner's consistent efforts to rectify the objections.
The limitation for filing objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act begins from the date a related application is disposed of, not just from receipt of the award.
Formal defects in the initial filing do not render it non-est, and consistent steps to remove defects justify the condonation of delay in re-filing.
An application to set aside an arbitral award must adhere strictly to procedural requirements, failing which it may be deemed non-est, thereby barring the challenge by limitation.
The judgment establishes the strict interpretation and application of the limitation period under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act, emphasizing the requirement for sufficient cause and the mandat....
The court adopted a liberal and justice-oriented approach in condoning the delay, considering the petitioner's explanation for the delay and citing relevant case laws.
The law of limitation aims to prevent outdated, fictitious, or fraudulent claims and requires parties to exercise their rights within the prescribed time. The Court emphasized the need for due dilige....
The Court emphasized the importance of due diligence and dispatch in exercising the right to challenge an Arbitral Award within the prescribed time, as per the provisions of the Arbitration Act.
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
