Limitation Act- Acknowledgement Section 18 of Limitation Act

Any claim which is hopelessly barred by the law of limitation is certainly opposed to public policy and patently illegal for the reason that if such claims are entertained, there will be no finality for any Arbitration – M/s. Saravana Global Holdings Ltd. Vs. N.Jayamurugan – Madras Higha Court

Hon’ble High Court held that an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act can be entertained by this Court whenever a decision of an arbitral tribunal rendered in its award is opposed to public policy and patently illegal. Any claim which is hopelessly barred by the law of limitation is certainly opposed to public policy and patently illegal for the reason that if such claims are entertained, there will be no finality for any litigation / arbitration. In the instant case, it is undoubtedly clear that the arbitral award has been passed in respect of a time barred claim and that there has been no express promise to pay in writing a time barred debt.

Any claim which is hopelessly barred by the law of limitation is certainly opposed to public policy and patently illegal for the reason that if such claims are entertained, there will be no finality for any Arbitration – M/s. Saravana Global Holdings Ltd. Vs. N.Jayamurugan – Madras Higha Court Read Post »

Section 29A of Arbitration Act as amended in 2019 is applicable to Awards which though were commenced prior to the 2019 amendment, but are still pending challenge under Section 34 and There is no requirement under the law that consent to the name of the Arbitrator has to be given only in response to Notice of invocation – Elecon Engineering Company Ltd. Vs. The Indure Pvt. Ltd. – Delhi High Court

In this important judgment, Hon’ble High Court clarified various issues such as (i) there is no requirement under the law that consent to the name of the Arbitrator has to be given only in response to Notice of invocation. (ii) Mere dismissal of an application under Section 12 of the A & C Act, 1996 cannot be considered as a reason to give rise to any reasonable apprehension of any kind of bias in favour of one party. (iii) Section 29A as amended in 2019 is applicable to Awards which though were commenced prior to the 2019 amendment, but are still pending challenge under Section 34 of the A & C Act, 1996. (iv) The date on which the respondent herein filed their Statement of Claim and supporting documents will be construed as the date on which the pleadings were completed. (v) It cannot be ignored or overlooked that the objections under Section 34 of A & C Act, 1996 are not by nature of an appeal and an award cannot be disturbed by re-appreciating the evidence. However, an award can be disturbed if it is found to be perverse and against the public policy of India. Any award based on no evidence or which is contrary to the law of the land has to be necessarily set aside. (vi) even if the parties have agreed to refer their claim to the learned Arbitrator, it would still not be within their domain to concede to availability of legal remedy the claim itself is found to be time-barred. (vii) Claim for Liquidated Damages etc.

Section 29A of Arbitration Act as amended in 2019 is applicable to Awards which though were commenced prior to the 2019 amendment, but are still pending challenge under Section 34 and There is no requirement under the law that consent to the name of the Arbitrator has to be given only in response to Notice of invocation – Elecon Engineering Company Ltd. Vs. The Indure Pvt. Ltd. – Delhi High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top