Back
ORISSA HIGH COURT
TR CHEMICALS LTD. SUNDERGARH – Appellant
Versus
BAJRANG METALLIC LTD. SUNDERGARH – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJEEB K. PANIGRAHI, J.
1. The present Writ Petition arises out of an order dated 04.07.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Commercial Court, Rourkela in ARBP No.03/31 of 2024-2025, whereby an application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was dismissed.
I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
(i) The Section 34 application before the Commercial Court was directed against an arbitral award dated 31.08.2016 passed in MSEFC Case No. 04 under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act.
(ii) The dispute between the parties originates from a transaction relating to supply of iron ore fines and iron weighing for a value of Rs. 22,89,553, in respect of which deductions were made by the petitioner on the ground of sub-standard quality.
(iii) Bajrang Metallic Ltd invoked Section 18 of the MSMED Act before the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, registering MSEFC Case No. 04 of 2014 for a total claim of Rs.27,95,520.18, to which the petitioner filed its response.
(iv) The Facilitation Council initially passed an order dated 10.09.2015 directing payment of principal and i
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.
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 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 Court emphasized the importance of adhering to the statutory provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, particularly regarding the filing of Section 34 applications during the pendency o....
The limitation period for an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act cannot be extended beyond specified timelines, maintaining strict adherence to legal provisions.
The limitation period for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is strict and non-extendable, emphasizing the need for timely recourse to mai....
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
