https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106817 Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to an application under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 because section 34(3) expressly limits further extension by using the words "but not thereafter." The Court treated this as an express exclusion within the meaning of section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, reinforced by the Act's restrictive scheme of minimal judicial intervention and immediate enforceability of the award after expiry of the section 34 period. Delay beyond the additional thirty-day period cannot be condoned. en-us Fri, 05 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Oct 2025 11:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106817 Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to an application under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 because section 34(3) expressly limits further extension by using the words "but not thereafter." The Court treated this as an express exclusion within the meaning of section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, reinforced by the Act's restrictive scheme of minimal judicial intervention and immediate enforceability of the award after expiry of the section 34 period. Delay beyond the additional thirty-day period cannot be condoned. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 05 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106817