Bharat Rasayan Finance Ltd. vs Ravi Chand Sindhu And Anr.
2014 Latest Caselaw 269 Del

*            IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                         FAO No.254/2010

%                                                   15th January, 2014

BHARAT RASAYAN FINANCE LTD.               ......Appellant
                 Through: Mr. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate.



                          VERSUS

RAVI CHAND SINDHU AND ANR.                     ...... Respondents
                 Through:   Col. Inder Jeet Singh, on behalf of
                           respondent No.1.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA

To be referred to the Reporter or not?


VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1.           The present appeal is filed against the judgment of the Court

below dismissing the objections of the appellant under Section 34 of the

Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as

being barred by time. Objection petition under Section 34 has been found to

be barred by time on the ground that the Award is dated 17.8.2009 and the

objections under Section 34 have been filed on 27.11.2009 i.e after the three

months period of passing of the Award.


FAO No.254/2010                                                 Page 1 of 3
 2.           The Court below has clearly erred because as per Section 34(3)

of the Act period of three months starts from receipt of the Award and not

from the date of the Award. The impugned order does not even discuss the

date of receipt of the Award by the appellant/petitioner. I may note that the

appellant/petitioner has stated at page 4 of this appeal that the Award was

received by the appellant from the National Stock Exchange with covering

letter dated 24.8.2009. If this be so then the objections would have been

within a limitation period of 90 days. In any case, even if the objections

were filed after 90 days, Section 34 of the Act states that there can be

condonation of delay for a period of 30 days more i.e objections can be filed

in a total period of four months.

3.           In the present case, since there is no finding of the Court below

that the Award was received by the petitioner on a particular date, the

impugned order dismissing the objections as barred by time is clearly

misconceived.

4.           The impugned order dated 8.3.2010 is accordingly set aside and

the matter is remanded to the Court below for deciding the objections afresh

after considering the documents and evidence if so required to be led on

behalf of the appellant/petitioner as to when the appellant/petitioner received

the Award for the period of limitation to commence against the appellant.
FAO No.254/2010                                                  Page 2 of 3
 5.          Appeal is accordingly allowed, leaving the parties to bear their

own costs. Parties to appear before the District & Sessions Judge, Central,

Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi on 18.2.2014 and the District & Sessions Judge

will thereafter mark the objections under Section 34 of the Act for decision

to a competent Court in accordance with law.




JANUARY 15, 2014                            VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

Ne