The limitation for filing a Section 34 application under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act commences upon receipt of a signed copy of the Arbitral Award, and delivery to a representative suffices for compliance.

JUDGMENT :

NAVIN CHAWLA, J.

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short, ‘A&C Act’), challenging the Order dated 18.10.2024 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Impugned Order’) passed by the District Judge (Commercial Court- 01) East District Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned Trial Court’) in OMP (COMM) No. 11/2022, titled Kiran Suran v. Satish Kumar & Ors. (hereinafter referred to as ‘Section 34 Petition’), whereby, the learned Trial Court has dismissed the application filed by the appellant herein under Section 34(3) of the A&C Act seeking condonation of delay of 287 days in filing the said Section 34 Petition.

Case of the Appellant:

2. The appellant, on or around 18.04.2022, had filed the above mentioned Section 34 petition challenging the Arbitral Award dated 03.06.2019 passed by a learned Sole Arbitrator (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Impugned Award’).

3. The learned Sole Arbitrator had been appointed by this Court vide its Order dated 16.10.2005 passed on an application filed under Section 11 of the A&C Act by Late Shri N.K. Chopra, father of the appellant, and Late Shri I.P. Chopra, respondent no. 17 herein, against the respondent no. 1, Mr. B.P. Arora (now represented by the respondent nos. 3 and 4), and Mrs. Sushma Arora, respondent no. 5 herein, to adjudicate the disputes that had arisen between the parties in relation to the Collaboration Agreement dated 14.05.2001 between these parties. Later, the subsequent transferees from the said respondents were also added as parties to the arbitration proceedings.

4. As the Section 34 Petition had been filed beyond the period prescribed in Section 34(3) of the A&C Act, the appellant filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Limitation Act’) seeking condonation of delay of 287 days in filing the same. The said application along with the Section 34 Petition has been dismissed by the learned Trial Court by way of the Impugned Order as being barred by limitation prescribed in Section 34(3) of the A&C Act.

5. In the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, it is the case of the appellant that the appellant was not aware of the arbitration proceedings before the learned Sole Arbitrator. She, on 06.04.2021, had received a notice from the Court of the learned ADJ - 06, District West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Execution Petition No. 277/2020, titled Shyam Sunder Gupta & Ors v. Sh. N.K. Chopra (since deceased) & Ors. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Execution Petition’) along with an incomplete copy of the Impugned Award. It was asserted that thereafter, the appellant filed her objections under Section 34(2) of the A&C Act in the Execution Petition, however, the same were dismissed vide Order dated 21.12.2021 as being not maintainable in the Execution Petition. It was asserted that therefore, the appellant was pursuing the above objections in good faith from 04.10.2021 till 21.12.2021, whereafter the appellant obtained the certified copy of the Order dated 21.12.2021, on 30.12.2021, and filed the Section 34 Petition on 18.04.2022.

6. In the application, it was further asserted that in view of the Orders passed by the Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No. 03/2020, the period between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 is to be excluded for purposes of limitation, and where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2020, it shall stand extended by a further 90 days from 01.03.2022. The appellant contended that on account of Covid-19, she was having a bona fide ground for seeking condonation of delay.

7. Before us, it is asserted that the appellant did not have “sufficient knowledge” about the said arbitration proceedings before the learned Sole Arbitrator and also about the Impugned Award until the receipt of notice of the Exe