Delhi High Court
Sidhi Industries & Ors vs Religare Finvest Limited on 10 June, 2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment reserved on: 31st May, 2016
Judgment pronounced on : 10th June, 2016
+ IA No. 3275/2015 in O.M.P. (COMM) No.6/2015
SIDHI INDUSTRIES &ORS ..... Petitioners
Through Mr. Ashish Virmani, Adv.
versus
RELIGARE FINVEST LIMITED ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Ajay Uppal, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH
MANMOHAN SINGH, J.
1. The petitioners have challenged the award by filing of objection
under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996
(hereinafter referred to as the "Act") for setting aside the arbitral
award passed by the Arbitrator (respondent No.2) dated 30th August,
2014.
2. Along with the objection, the petitioners have also filed an
application for condonation of delay of 15 days in filing the objections
under Section 34 of the Act as the impugned award was published on
30th August, 2014, however as per the petitioners, the same was
received by them on 16th September, 2014.
3. The objections were filed on 12th February, 2015.
4. Section 34 of the Act reads as under:-
34. Application for setting aside arbitral award. --
(1) Recourse to a Court against an arbitral award may be
made only by an application for setting aside such award in
accordance with sub-section (2) and sub-section (3).
(2) An arbitral award may be set aside by the Court only
if--
(a) the party making the application furnishes proof
that--
(i) a party was under some incapacity, or
(ii) the arbitration agreement is not valid under the law
to which the parties have subjected it or, failing any
indication thereon, under the law for the time being in
force; or
(iii) the party making the application was not given
proper notice of the appointment of an arbitrator or of
the arbitral proceedings or was otherwise unable to
present his case; or
(iv) the arbitral award deals with a dispute not
contemplated by or not falling within the terms of the
submission to arbitration, or it contains decisions on
matters beyond the scope of the submission to
arbitration:
Provided that, if the decisions on matters submitted to
arbitration can be separated from those not so
submitted, only that part of the arbitral award which
contains decisions on matters not submitted to
arbitration may be set aside; or
(v) the composition of the arbitral tribunal or the
arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the
agreement of the parties, unless such agreement was in
conflict with a provision of this Part from which the
parties cannot derogate, or, failing such agreement, was
not in accordance with this Part; or
(b) the Court finds that--
(i) the subject-matter of the dispute is not capable of
settlement by arbitration under the law for the time
being in force, or
(ii) the arbitral award is in conflict with the public policy
of India.
Explanation. --Without prejudice to the generality of sub-
clause (ii) it is hereby declared, for the avoidance of any
doubt, that an award is in conflict with the public policy of
India if the making of the award was induced or affected
by fraud or corruption or was in violation of section 75 or
section 81.
(3) An application for setting aside may not be made after
three months have elapsed from the date on which the
party making that application had received the arbitral
award or, if a request had been made under section 33,
from the date on which that request had been disposed of
by the arbitral tribunal: Provided that if the Court is
satisfied that the applicant was prevented by sufficient
cause from making the application within the said period of
three months it may entertain the application
within a further period of thirty days, but not
thereafter.
(4) On receipt of an application under sub-section (1), the
Court may, where it is appropriate and it is so requested
by a party, adjourn the proceedings for a period of time
determined by it in order to give the arbitral tribunal an
opportunity to resume the arbitral proceedings or to take
such other action as in the opinion of arbitral tribunal will
eliminate the grounds for setting aside the arbitral award.
5. It is apparent that the award was filed after the expiry period of
three months and extended period of 30 days.
6. In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of
Union of India v. M/s Popular Constructions Co. reported in AIR
2001 SC 4010, the objections are time barred and thus, the same are
dismissed as the time for filing the objection cannot be extended
beyond the period and stipulated under Section 34 of the Act. The
application is also dismissed.
7. No costs.
(MANMOHAN SINGH)
JUDGE
JUNE 10, 2016
