<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (7) TMI 581 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160011</link>
    <description>Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to proceedings for setting aside an arbitral award under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, because the special limitation regime in Section 34(3) does not expressly exclude that provision. Section 34(3) fixes a three-month period, with only a limited further extension, and Section 5 is excluded to that extent; however, Section 14 remains available where time was spent bona fide before a court lacking jurisdiction. The provisions are to be read harmoniously, so exclusion of such time is permissible in appropriate cases. The earlier view against Section 14 was set aside, and the limitation application was required to be considered on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=338376" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (7) TMI 581 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160011</link>
      <description>Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to proceedings for setting aside an arbitral award under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, because the special limitation regime in Section 34(3) does not expressly exclude that provision. Section 34(3) fixes a three-month period, with only a limited further extension, and Section 5 is excluded to that extent; however, Section 14 remains available where time was spent bona fide before a court lacking jurisdiction. The provisions are to be read harmoniously, so exclusion of such time is permissible in appropriate cases. The earlier view against Section 14 was set aside, and the limitation application was required to be considered on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160011</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>