Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, RAKESH KAINTHLA
Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Bansal Generation Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 20.9.2023, passed by learned Single Judge of this Court, vide which a petition filed by the appellant (original petitioner) under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was held to be barred by limitation and the benefit of Section 14 of LIMITATION ACT was not extended to it. (Parties shall hereinafter bereferred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Single Judge for convenience).
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that a dispute arose between the parties on the supply of transformers and their payment. The respondent took recourse to Chapter V of the Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSMED Act) and raised a dispute before the Facilitation Council at Shimla. A notice was served upon the petitioner, and it filed a detailed reply. The council passed an order on 6.3.2017 and transferred the matter to the learned Arbitrator. The proceedings were conducted before the learned Arbitrator, who passed an award on 6.7.2018 for Rs. 2,11,871/- and a sum of Rs.22,82,060/- minus Rs.8,90,676/- i.e. Rs.13,91,384
Section 14 of the Limitation Act applies to petitions under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, allowing exclusion of time spent in an incorrect forum if acted upon with due diligence.
The absence of a condonation application renders a challenge to an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act invalid if filed beyond the statutory limitation period.
The limitation period for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34 starts from the disposal of a Section 33 application, not from the receipt of the award.
The court determined that delay in filing a Section 34 application was justifiable due to the appellant's prior bona fide pursuit of a Writ Petition and the impact of COVID-19 on limitation periods.
The application under Section 34(2) of the Act was not entitled to the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, as the appellant did not prosecute any civil proceedings in good faith and with due....
The withdrawal of an application challenging an arbitral award for a bona fide reason allows for the filing of a subsequent application within the limitation period, and the provision of Order XXIII ....
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
