The document summarizes a court case in India regarding an appeal of an arbitration award. The appellant sought to overturn part of an arbitration award, but filed their objections more than 3 months after receiving the signed award, which is past the statutory limitation period. The trial court dismissed the objections as time-barred. The appeals court upheld this decision, finding no issues with the trial court's determination that the objections were filed late. However, the appeals court noted the trial court should not have commented on the case merits after finding it was time-barred.
The document summarizes a court case in India regarding an appeal of an arbitration award. The appellant sought to overturn part of an arbitration award, but filed their objections more than 3 months after receiving the signed award, which is past the statutory limitation period. The trial court dismissed the objections as time-barred. The appeals court upheld this decision, finding no issues with the trial court's determination that the objections were filed late. However, the appeals court noted the trial court should not have commented on the case merits after finding it was time-barred.
The document summarizes a court case in India regarding an appeal of an arbitration award. The appellant sought to overturn part of an arbitration award, but filed their objections more than 3 months after receiving the signed award, which is past the statutory limitation period. The trial court dismissed the objections as time-barred. The appeals court upheld this decision, finding no issues with the trial court's determination that the objections were filed late. However, the appeals court noted the trial court should not have commented on the case merits after finding it was time-barred.
FAO 58/2020 Decided On: 05.02.2020 Appellants: India Waste Energy Development Ltd. Vs. Respondent: Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors. Hon'ble Judges/Coram: Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. Counsels: For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Manashwy Jha, Advocate For Respondents/Defendant: Ramesh Singh, Standing Counsel, Tejra Narula and Ishan Agrawal, Advs. JUDGMENT Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. CM APPL. 4626/2020 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CM APPL. 4628/2020 (for condonation of delay in re-filing) 1. Appellant, by the present application, seeks condonation of delay of 7 days in re- filing of the appeal. 2 . It is contended that the appeal was originally filed within time, however, certain objections were raised by the Registry and it took some time for the Director of the appellant Company to collect the complete Trial Court record. It is also contended that the Director of the appellant Company is a senior citizen suffering from different medical conditions, as such, it took some time in collecting the record and removing the objections. 3 . For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed. Delay of 7 days in re-filing of the appeal is condoned. FAO 58/2020 & CM APPL. 4627/2020 (seeking summoning of Trial Court Record) 4 . Appellant impugns order dated 03.10.2019, whereby, objection petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed on the ground of limitation as also on merits. 5 . Appellant had filed objections under section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) challenging the award dated 06.04.2017 to a limited extent that it awarded a lesser amount than the amount claimed by the appellant. 6 . The Trial Court has noticed that the original signed copy of the Award dated 06.04.2017 was received by the Director of the appellant on 14.04.2017. 7. In terms of Section 34(3) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, an application for
24-02-2020 (Page 1 of 2) www.manupatra.com Ashim Aggarwal
MD, Mendez - Time Spent To Look For Advocate or Legal Assistance Is Sufficient Reason For Extension of Time, Illegality As Ground For Revision, Mase Simon Rhobin v. Green Star English Medium School