https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165225 An application to have an arbitral award made a rule of court was treated as a request for the arbitrator to file the award in court, not as an application under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act. Because the arbitrator had given no express authority to the applicant to file the award and the forwarding letter showed the signed copy was sent only for information, Article 119(a) of the Limitation Act applied. On the evidence, the courts found receipt of the award in March 1965, and the applicant failed to produce the registered cover to support a later date. The application was therefore time-barred, and the explanation offered did not establish sufficient cause for condonation under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. en-us Tue, 08 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Jul 2014 12:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165225 An application to have an arbitral award made a rule of court was treated as a request for the arbitrator to file the award in court, not as an application under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act. Because the arbitrator had given no express authority to the applicant to file the award and the forwarding letter showed the signed copy was sent only for information, Article 119(a) of the Limitation Act applied. On the evidence, the courts found receipt of the award in March 1965, and the applicant failed to produce the registered cover to support a later date. The application was therefore time-barred, and the explanation offered did not establish sufficient cause for condonation under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 08 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165225