Arbitral award limitation under Section 34 restarts only if a Section 33 request changes the award; mere rejection does not extend time.

Section 34(3) limitation runs from receipt of the arbitral award, but where a valid Section 33 request is made, the later start date applies only if the tribunal corrects, interprets, or makes an additional award so that the original award is modified. If the Section 33 application is merely rejected without any such change, no fresh limitation period begins. The Court further stated that delay cannot be condoned beyond the statutory period under Section 34(3), except to the extent time is excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. On that basis, the Section 34 petition was held time-barred.

---

---

Issues: Whether a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was within limitation where an application under Section 33 had been filed and rejected without any correction, interpretation, or additional award.

Analysis: The limitation under Section 34(3) runs from receipt of the arbitral award, or where a valid Section 33 request has been made, from the date on which that request is disposed of by the arbitral tribunal. The extended starting point applies only when the Section 33 proceeding results in a correction, interpretation, or additional award so that the original award is modified. Where the tribunal merely rejects the Section 33 application without altering the award, no fresh period of limitation begins. The Court also held that, apart from exclusion of time under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, there is no power to condone delay beyond the statutory period prescribed in Section 34(3).

Conclusion: The petition under Section 34 was time-barred and liable to be dismissed.

---