https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218865 The Calcutta HC held that the outer limit in Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is mandatory: an application to set aside an arbitral award must be filed within three months, with only a further thirty days on sufficient cause shown, and no delay beyond that can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The plea of fraud did not assist because it was not properly pleaded before the arbitrator or the court below, and no particulars or proof were available to invoke any exclusionary principle. The challenge was therefore barred by limitation. en-us Tue, 25 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Nov 2012 19:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218865 The Calcutta HC held that the outer limit in Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is mandatory: an application to set aside an arbitral award must be filed within three months, with only a further thirty days on sufficient cause shown, and no delay beyond that can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The plea of fraud did not assist because it was not properly pleaded before the arbitrator or the court below, and no particulars or proof were available to invoke any exclusionary principle. The challenge was therefore barred by limitation. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 25 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218865