NHPC Limited vs BGS-SGS-SOMA JV

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
REKHA PALLI
NHPC Limited – Appellant
Versus
BGS-SGS-SOMA JV – Respondent

Table of Content
1. background of the dispute over an arbitral award. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. arguments on applicability of section 14 of the limitation act. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
3. counterarguments regarding fresh petition vs. re-presentation. (Para 11 , 12 , 15 , 16)
4. court's observations on the conduct and intentions of the parties. (Para 13 , 14 , 18 , 20 , 26 , 27 , 28)
5. legal standards applied to determine petition status. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
6. calculation of limitation periods and exclusion considerations. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35)
7. final decision on granting relief and application of the limitation act. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39)
8. order for future hearings. (Para 40)

JUDGMENT

Rekha Palli, J.

I.A.1672/2020

1. The present application under Section 14 of the LIMITATION ACT , 1963 filed by NHPC Limited, the petitioner in the accompanying petition preferred under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act), though styled as one seeking condonation of delay, primarily seeks exclusion of the time spent by the petitioner in prosecuting its initial challenge to the arbitral Award before a Court without jurisdiction.

2. The subj

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

DELHI HIGH COURTREKHA PALLINHPC Limited – AppellantVersusBGS-SGS-SOMA JV – Respondent

DELHI HIGH COURT
REKHA PALLI
NHPC Limited – Appellant
Versus
BGS-SGS-SOMA JV – Respondent