SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(ALL) 300

HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Hon'ble Shekhar B. Saraf,J.
Smt. Sudha – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India And 3 Others – Respondent
APPEAL UNDER SECTION 37 OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996 No. - 271 of 2022 at Allahabad



Advocates:
Petitioner: Ravi Kant and Vatsala
Respondent: A.S.G.I. , Pranjal Mehrotra and Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal

The limitation period for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 commences from the date of receipt of the signed copy of the award.

Headnote:

ARBITRATION - LIMITATION - SECTION 34 - Limitation for challenging an award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 commences from the date on which the party making the application has received a signed copy of the arbitral award.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant filed an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against an order passed by the learned District Judge, Rampur dated August 8, 2022. The appellant submitted that the appeal before the learned District Judge, Rampur was filed within the period prescribed under Section 34(3) of the Act as only the certified copy of the arbitral award was received by the appellant on August 6, 2022 and signed copy of the arbitral award was never received by the appellant.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the learned District Judge should have inquired and found out the date of receipt of the signed copy of the arbitral award. In absence of having done so, the learned District Judge has failed to appreciate the law established by the Supreme Court in the case of Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited vs. Navigant Technologies Private Limited reported in (2021) 7 SCC 657 wherein it has been specifically held that the period of limitation for challenging an award under Section 34 of the Act commences from the date on which the party making the application has received a signed copy of the arbitral award.

Issues: Whether the appeal was filed within the limitation period prescribed under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Ratio Decidendi: The period of limitation for challenging an award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 commences from the date on which the party making the application has received a signed copy of the arbitral award.

Final Decision: The appeal was allowed. The order dated August 8, 2022 was quashed and set aside and the matter was remanded to the learned District Judge with a direction to examine the records and ascertain the date of receipt of the signed copy of the arbitral award and thereafter pass a reasoned order.

Hon'ble Shekhar B. Saraf,J.

1.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel appearing

for the respondents.

2.

This is an appeal filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) against an order

passed by the learned District Judge, Rampur dated August 8, 2022.

3.

Counsel on behalf of the appellant submits that the appeal before the

learned District Judge, Rampur was filed within the period prescribed under

Section 34(3) of the Act as only the certified copy of the arbitral award was

received by the appellant on August 6, 2022 and signed copy of the arbitral

award was never received by the appellant. Counsel further submits that the

appeal against the said award was filed before the learned District Judge on

August 6, 2022, and therefore, there was no delay in filing of the said

appeal.

4.

Per contra, counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits

that the appeal was filed after about a year of passing of the award, and

accordingly, since Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act is not applicable to

Section 34 of the Act, the learned District Judge has acted properly.

5.

Upon perusal of the order passed under Section 34 of the Act, it

appears that the learned District Judge has only recorded the submission of

the appellant that the signed copy of the arbitral award was never received

2

by her. However, there does not appear to be any finding as to when the

signed copy of the award was served upon the appellant.

6.

In my view, the learned District Judge should have inquired and found

out the date of receipt of the signed copy of the arbitral award. In absence of

having done so, the learned District Judge has failed to appreciate the law

established by the Supreme Court in the case of Dakshin Haryana Bijli

Vitran Nigam Limited vs. Navigant Technologies Private Limited reported

in (2021) 7 SCC 657 wherein it has been specifically held that the period of

limitation for challenging an award under Section 34 of the Act commences

from the date on which the party making the application has received a

signed copy of the arbitral award. Relevant paragraphs of the said judgment

are delineated below:-

    35. The date on which the signed award is provided to the
    parties is a crucial date in arbitration proceedings under the
    Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It is from this date that:

35.1. The period of 30 days for filing an application under

Section 33 for correction and interpretation of the award, or

additional award may be filed.

35.2. The arbitral proceedings would terminate as provided by

Section 32(1) of the Act.

35.3. The period of limitation for filing objections to the award

under Section 34 commences.

36. Section 34 provides recourse for judicial scrutiny of the

award by a court, upon making an application under sub-

sections (2) and (3) for setting aside the award. The period of

limitation for filing the objections to the award under Section

34 commences from the date on which the party making the

application has “received” a signed copy of the arbitral award,

as required by Section 31(5) of the 1996 Act. Section 34(3)

provides a specific time-limit of three months from the date of

“receipt” of the award, and a further period of thirty days, if

the court is satisfied that the party was prevented by sufficient

3

cause from making the application within the said period, but

not thereafter.”

7.

In view of the fact that the learned District Judge has not recorded any

finding with regard to date of receipt of the signed copy of the arbitral

award, I am of the view that the matter is required to be remanded to the

learned District Judge for taking a fresh decision.

8.

In light of the above, the appeal is allowed. The order dated August 8,

2022 is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to the learned

District Judge with a direction to examine the records and ascertain the date

of receipt of the signed copy of the arbitral award and thereafter pass a

reasoned order.

Order Date :- 19.3.2024

Rakesh

(Shek



      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      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

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top