IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 18.11.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH A.No.5499 of 2025 AND Arb.O.P.(Com.Div.) DR. No.54905 of 2025

1.Velangani Education Society & Sri Chanakya Educational Trust St. Antony’s Public School and Sri Chanakya PU College of Commerce Siddeshwar Park Vidyanagar Dharwad 580 031

2.Kosagi Anandraj Prasad

3.Anthoni Kiran Kosagi

4.Kavitha Leena Kosagi .. Applicants Vs.

M/s.Shiksha Financial Services India Private Limited Regd. Office at No.497, 3^rd Floor Kattima Isana Mall Poonamallee High Road Arumbakkam, Chennai 600 106 Rep. by its Senior Manager-Legal N.Elumalai

2.H.Mohammed Ismail .. Respondent Application filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of O.S.Rules read with Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, praying to record the deficit court fee of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) paid on 26.06.2025 by the petitioners.

Original Petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, read with Section 2(1)(c)(i) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, read with Rule 5(iv) of the Madras High Court (Arbitration) Rules, 2020, to set aside the award dated 23.10.2024 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal in Arbitration Case No.53 of 2024.

For Applicants : Ms.S.S.Rithika

O R D E R

This application has been filed to permit the applicants to pay the deficit court fee of Rs.25,000/-.

2.Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the materials available on record.

3.In the case in hand, the award was passed on 23.10.2024 and it was received by the applicant on 04.11.2024. The 90 days period comes to an end on 04.02.2025 and the petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("in short "the Act") was filed on 03.02.2025. Thereafter, the deficit court fee of Rs.25,000/- has been paid on 26.06.2025 by the applicant. The only issue that arises for consideration is, as to whether such deficit court fee can be permitted to be paid and condoned beyond the condonable limit prescribed under Section 34(3) of the Act.

4.The issue is no longer res integra and it is covered by the earlier order passed by me in A.Nos.4872 and 4874 of 2025 dated 23.10.2025 and the relevant portion is extracted hereunder :

“29. All the above judgments make it clear that filing of a petition with deficit Court fee cannot be construed as proper presentation of the petition. If such presentation of the petition has to be regularized, the deficit Court fee must be paid within the limitation period prescribed under Section 34(3) of A and C Act. If the same is not done, the Court is divested of its power to condone the delay in the light of mandate prescribed under Section 34(3) of A and C Act. In other words, improper presentation of the petition by paying deficit Court fee, does not arrest the limitation period prescribed under sub-section (3) of Section 3 of A and C Act, unless the deficit Court fee is paid within the limitation period prescribed in that provision. If the limitation period is crossed, an application filed thereafter to condone the delay in paying the deficit Court fee cannot even be entertained, since it goes beyond the power of the Court which is circumscribed under Section 34(3)

of A and C Act.”

5.In view of the above, since the deficit court fee has been paid only on

26.06.2025, which is much beyond the period of limitation that is condonable under Sub-Section 3 of Section 34 of the Act, this Court cannot condone this delay and hence, this application has to necessarily fail. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. Consequently, Arb.O.P. (Com.Div.) DR. No.54905 of 2025 stands rejected at the SR stage itself.

18.11.2025 gya N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.

gya A.No.5499 of 2025 AND Arb.O.P.(Com.Div.) DR. No.54905 of 2025

18.11.2025