Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Right to Promotion is Legitimate Expectation; Marriage-Based Transfer Can't Defeat It: Himachal Pradesh High Court
12 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
*Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Vimla Singh Kapoor, JJ.
Union of India v. Todarmull Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. (Engineers and Contractors)
Headnote: Read headnote
1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 09.09.2019 passed by the Commercial Court, Raipur by which, the appellant's application under S.34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short "the Act of 1996") for setting aside the award has been dismissed as barred by limitation Act.
2. The factual matrix, relevant for decision of the controversy in this case are in narrow encompass stated as infra.
3. The appellant herein invited bid for certain works of extension. In response thereto, the respondent submitted his bid and the same was accepted leading to an agreement between the parties which was signed on 24.02.2014. Later on, dispute and differences having arisen between the parties, agreement was terminated on 09.09.2015 by the appellan
The limitation for setting aside an arbitral award begins from the date of receipt of the award, not from the rejection of an application under S.33.
The 120-day period prescribed under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for filing an application to set aside an arbitral award is absolute and unextendible by the court unde....
The limitation period for setting aside an arbitral award starts from the disposal of a request under Section 33, excluding the time taken for communication of that decision.
The application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act was dismissed as barred by limitation since filed after the three-month period following the award, with no eligibility for an extension under ....
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....
The statutory limitation period under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is inflexible, and applications filed beyond this period cannot be entertained.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the limitation period for challenging an award under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is strict and cannot be extended be....
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
Listen Article