AI Overview...
- Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd. - Main points and insights:
- The Supreme Court in Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd. (2011) 4 SCC 616 established that the limitation period for setting aside an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act begins only from the date a signed copy of the award is received by the party (References: Ahluwalia Contracts (india) Ltd VS Ashok Khanna - Delhi, PREM LATA TEWARI VS SUSHIL KUMAR - Allahabad).
- The judgment clarifies that the period of limitation does not start from the date of the award itself but from when the award is served or received in a signed form.
-
The case also discusses that the limitation period under Section 34(3) begins only after the award is served, emphasizing the importance of the receipt date for initiating proceedings to set aside an award (References: Ahluwalia Contracts (india) Ltd VS Ashok Khanna - Delhi, PREM LATA TEWARI VS SUSHIL KUMAR - Allahabad, State of Maharashtra VS Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd. - Rajasthan, Deepti Prakash Ghate VS NKGSB Co. Op. Bank Ltd. - Bombay).
-
Analysis and Conclusion:
- The consistent judicial view across multiple references confirms that the limitation for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34 starts from the date the party receives the signed copy of the award.
- This principle ensures that parties are aware of the exact commencement of limitation, preventing premature or delayed applications to set aside awards.
- The case law underscores the importance of actual receipt over mere issuance of the award for calculating the limitation period, providing clarity and consistency in arbitration proceedings involving Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd. (References: Jolly Brothers Pvt. Ltd. VS Surendra Nath Jolly - Bombay, Shamsudeen, S/o Rai Mammed VS Shreeram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. - Kerala, Shamsudeen VS Shreeram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. - Kerala, Shamsudeen, S/o Rai Mammed VS Shreeram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. - Kerala, Adityasai Cotspin Pvt. Ltd. VS Louis Drayfus Commodities India Pvt. Ltd. - Bombay, Deepti Prakash Ghate VS NKGSB Co. Op. Bank Ltd. - Bombay, PREM LATA TEWARI VS SUSHIL KUMAR - Allahabad).
Search Results for "Ark Builders Pvt Ltd"
2021 0 Supreme(Del) 1221 • India - Delhi
MANMOHAN, NAVIN CHAWLA
ARK Builders Pvt. Ltd., and Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitram Nigam Ltd. v. Navigant Technologies Pvt. ... Ltd. to establish that the period of limitation commences from the date of receipt of a signed copy of the Arbitral Award by the ... ARK Builders Pvt. Ltd., (2011) 4 SCC 616; and Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitram Nigam Ltd. v. Navigant Technologies Pvt. Ltd....
2011 2 Supreme 214 • India - Supreme Court
R.M.LODHA, AFTAB ALAM
2011 0 Supreme(Raj) 171 • India - Rajasthan
AFTAB ALAM, R.M.LODHA
2016 0 Supreme(Bom) 491 • India - Bombay
R.D.DHANUKA
Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd. ... Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd. (supra) also assist the case of the applicant and applies to the facts of this case. ... 14. ... Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd. AIR 2011 SC 1374, judgment of Supreme Court in case of Benarsi Krishna Committee and others vs. Karmyogi Shelters Private Limited (2012) 9 SCC 496 and judgment of this court in case of Mukesh Nanji Gala & Ors. vs....
2016 0 Supreme(Ker) 567 • India - Kerala
P.N.RAVINDRAN, A.M.BABU
Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd., AIR 2011 SC 1374. The decision of this court on the same point is Saju Vs. Muthoot Vehicle and Assets Finance Ltd., 2015 (4) KLT 394. ... With the above observation, we dismiss the appeal. No costs. ... Purbanchal Cables and Conductors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assam State Electricity Board, AIR 2012 SC 3167). What is important is the date of filing of the application under section 34(1) of the Act. ... 6.
2016 0 Supreme(Ker) 970 • India - Kerala
P.N.RAVINDRAN, A.M.BABU
Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd. (AIR 2011 SC 1374). The decision of this court on the same point is Saju v. Muthoot Vehicle and Assets Finance Ltd., (2015 (4) KLT 394). ... With the above observation, we dismiss the appeal. No costs. ... Purbanchal Cables and Conductors Pvt. Ltd. v. Assam State Electricity Board, AIR 2012 SC 3167). What is important is the date of filing of the application under section 34(1) of the Act. ... 6.
2017 0 Supreme(Ker) 38 • India - Kerala
P.N.RAVINDRAN, A.M.BABU
Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd., AIR 2011 SC 1374. The decision of this court on the same point is Saju v. Muthoot Vehicle and Assets Finance Ltd., 2015 (4) KLT 394. ... With the above observation, we dismiss the appeal. No costs. ... Purbanchal Cables and Conductors Pvt. Ltd. v. Assam State Electricity Board, AIR 2012 SC 3167). What is important is the date of filing of the application under section 34(1) of the Act. ... 6.
2015 0 Supreme(Bom) 209 • India - Bombay
R.D.DHANUKA
M/s.Ark Builders Pvt. ... Ltd., AIR 2011 SC 1374 relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner is concerned, in view of the fact that the parties in this case are governed by the statutory arbitration under the provisions of the rules framed by Cotton Association of India, this judgment does
2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 129 • India - Bombay
MANISH PITALE
Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd. (supra). 13. ... Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd. (Judgment and order dated 28.2.2011 in Civil Appeal No. 2152/2011). 8. ... Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd. (supra) shows that the period of limitation would start to run only when the original signed award was served on the petitioner. ... Erica Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. was advanced loan and cas....
2017 0 Supreme(All) 421 • India - Allahabad
SUDHIR AGARWAL, RAVINDRA NATH MISHRA II
Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd., (2011) 4SCC 616. Court therein observed that period of limitation under Section 34 (3) of Act, 1996 would start running only from the date a signed copy of award is delivered/received by party for making application for setting it aside under Section 34 (1) of Act, 1996.
Filter by Legal Phrase
