JUDGEMENT
R.F.NARIMAN,J. -
(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) On the facts of the present case, an Arbitral Award dated 19.12.2006 was made by Justice K.N. Saikia, retired Judge of this Court. From this, a Section 34 petition was filed and
rejected by the District Judge, Kamrup, Gauhati on 30.05.2016.
An appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation
Act, 1996 was filed from this order in March, 2017, that is
after a delay of 189 days from the 90 days that were given
under Article 116 of the Limitation Act for filing such appeal.
By the impugned judgment dated 24.06.2019, this delay was, on
facts, not condoned as no sufficient cause was made out.
(3.) Mr. Parthiv K. Goswami, learned advocate on behalf of the appellant has argued before us that unlike Section 34, Section
37 does not exclude Section 5 of the Limitation Act, as a result of which even if the 90 day period is over, if a
condonation application is made under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act, it should be considered on its own merits
notwithstanding the length of delay. Mr. Shuvodeep Roy,
learned counsel for the respondent supported the judgment under
appeal, stating that 189 days cannot be condoned as the object
of speedy resolution of disputes referred to arbitration would
be subverted.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.