Back
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Shivshakti Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
Telecommunications Consultants India Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for condonation of delay filed. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. respondent opposes delay in re-filing. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. objections filed within the permissible time. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. defects led to delay in re-filing. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 5. caution advised in condoning delays. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 6. delay in re-filing condoned for merits. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 7. application allowed, matter re-notified. (Para 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT
Neena Bansal Krishna, J.
I.A.3293/2020 (Condonation of Delay)
1. An application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for condonation of delay of 85 days in re-filing of petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996.
2. It is submitted in the application that the petition was filed on 06th November, 2019 which was within the limitation period. However, there was a delay of 85 days in removing the defects and refilling of the present petition. It is stated that the applicant is a resident of Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh and after Winter Vacations started on 25th December, 2019 to 05th January, 2020, there was unavoidable delay of 85 days in removing the defects and refilling the pe
Condonation of delay in re-filing under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is permitted when the initial filing is within the time limit, emphasizing merits over technicalities.
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The law of limitation aims to prevent outdated, fictitious, or fraudulent claims and requires parties to exercise their rights within the prescribed time.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 judgment establishes the principle that inordinate delay in refiling an application under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act without sufficient justification cannot be condoned.
The court emphasized the strict timelines prescribed in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and the Limitation Act, and held that delays beyond the statutory periods cannot be condoned.
Condonation of delay should be allowed if sufficient cause is shown, and the words 'sufficient cause' should be understood and applied in a reasonable, pragmatic, practical, and liberal manner.
Court can condone delays of less than 30 days in filing petitions under the Arbitration Act if sufficient cause is demonstrated, allowing for liberal interpretation of procedural requirements.
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
