Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Aptec Advanced Protecive Technologies AG – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. dismissal of appeal due to delay (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. appellant's arguments regarding commencement of limitation (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court analysis of filing time limits (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. strict timelines for filing objections under section 34 (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. administrative delays not sufficient to condone (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. final order finding no merit in appeal (Para 18) |
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral)--The appeal impugns the judgment dated 24.04.2019 whereby the petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") has been dismissed on the ground of delay.
2. Subject award was rendered on 18.06.2018. The admitted case of appellant is that the copy of the award was received in their office on 02.07.2018. This is also substantiated by the Dak Receipt Register wherein an entry has been made of receipt of the award on 02.07.2018.
3. The contention of the appellant is that the award was sent to the Legal Advisor (Defence) for an opinion, which opinion was received only on 06.09.2018 opining that objections under Section 34 of the Act need to be filed.
4. Learned counsel for t
The timelines for filing objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act are strict, and delays beyond the statutory periods cannot be condoned by courts, reaffirmed by Supreme Co....
The Court emphasized the strict timelines for filing objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and held that the delay beyond the prescribed period cannot be condoned....
The strict timelines for filing objections under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, preclude any condonation of delay beyond the specified limits, as established by precedent.
The calculation of the limitation period under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, requires the exclusion of the first day and the reckoning of the three-month period from the d....
The main legal point established is that the extendable period of 30 days under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is not the period of limitation, and the benefit of limitation on ac....
The unambiguous language of Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 excludes the applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, and delay beyond 30 days after the expiry of the....
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
