The limitation period for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34(3) commences upon actual receipt of the signed award, supported by documented evidence of signature on the date of the award.

JUDGMENT

Navin Chawla, J.

The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.

1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant challenging the Order dated 07.03.2020 passed by the learned District Judge (Commercial Court)-02, South-East District, Saket, Delhi, in OMP (COMM) 30 of 2018, titled M/s Ahluwalia Contracts (India) Ltd. v. Ashok Khanna, dismissing the application of the appellant herein filed under Section 34 (3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the `Act') read with Section 5 of the LIMITATION ACT , 1963, seeking condonation of delay in filing of the application under Section 34 of the Act in challenge to the Arbitral Award dated 02.08.2018 passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator.

2. The controversy, in brief, is the date on which the limitation to file the application under Section 34 of the Act commenced. This dispute is premised on the underlined submission of the appellant that the signed copy of the Arbitral Award was received by the appellant only on 07.09.2018, while it is the case of the respondent, which has also been accepted by the learned District Judge, that the signed copy of the Arbitral Award was supplied to the appellant by the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (hereinafter referred to as the `DIAC'), under whose aegis the arbitration proceedings had been conducted, on 02.08.2018 itself, that is, the date of the Arbitral Award.

3. As the issue involved is only of period of limitation for filing of the application under Section 34 of the Act, both the parties have rightly not made any submissions on the merit of the Arbitral Award nor shall we be discussing the same in this present appeal.

4. Sub-Section (3) of Section 34 of the Act reads as under:

"34. Application for setting aside arbitral award.--

(3) An application for setting aside may not be made after three months have elapsed from the date on which the party making that application had received the arbitral award or, if a request had been made under Section 33, from the date on which that request had been disposed of by the arbitral tribunal:

Provided that if the Court is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application within the said period of three months it may entertain the application within a further period of thirty days, but not thereafter."

5. It is no longer res integra that the period of limitation provided under Section 34 (3) of the Act commences from the date of receipt of a signed copy of the Arbitral Award by the applicant. In this regard, reference may be made to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Tecco Trichy Engineers & Contractors, (2005) 4 SCC 239; State of Maharashtra & Ors. v. ARK Builders Pvt. Ltd., (2011) 4 SCC 616; and Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitram Nigam Ltd. v. Navigant Technologies Pvt. Ltd., 2021 SCC OnLine SC 157.

6. As noted hereinabove, the dispute between the parties in the present appeal is only with regard to the date on which the appellant received a signed copy of the Arbitral Award. It is the case of the appellant that by an e-mail dated 30.07.2018, the parties to the arbitration proceedings were informed by the DIAC that the learned Sole Arbitrator will pronounce the Arbitral Award on 02.08.2018 at 02:30 pm. The parties were further informed, as under:

"The Original Signed Award is only handed over to the parties in person and not to their respective Counsel. The same is handed over to the respective Co