Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an application for reference to arbitration under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act was barred by limitation and whether the dispute could still be referred to an arbitrator.
Analysis: The limitation law applies to arbitration proceedings, and an application under Section 20 is governed by Article 137 of the Limitation Act. The cause of arbitration accrues when the claimant first acquires the right to require arbitration, and limitation runs from the date of accrual of that cause. Repeated reminders do not postpone accrual. On the admitted facts, the demands, repudiations, and subsequent final bills showed that the claim had become stale before the suits were filed, and the notices issued long later could not revive a time-barred claim. Where no subsisting claim survives on the admitted facts, the Court can refuse reference instead of driving the parties to arbitration.
Conclusion: The claim was barred by limitation and could not be referred to arbitration.
Final Conclusion: The judgment of the learned single Judge was set aside and the appeals were allowed, with the suits for reference to arbitration dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi: For an application seeking reference to arbitration, limitation begins when the cause of arbitration accrues, and a claim already barred on admitted facts need not be referred to an arbitrator.