https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171084 An award presented for registration after the statutory period was nevertheless treated as timely because it had been filed in court within time, remained in court custody, and the arbitrators were restrained by subsisting judicial orders from taking further steps. The Court applied the principles that an act of court should prejudice no one and that the law does not compel impossibilities, together with the exclusion of time rationale reflected in limitation law, to hold that the period of court custody and restraint could not be counted against the parties. Registration was therefore upheld and the challenge based on limitation failed. en-us Mon, 14 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Oct 2025 13:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171084 An award presented for registration after the statutory period was nevertheless treated as timely because it had been filed in court within time, remained in court custody, and the arbitrators were restrained by subsisting judicial orders from taking further steps. The Court applied the principles that an act of court should prejudice no one and that the law does not compel impossibilities, together with the exclusion of time rationale reflected in limitation law, to hold that the period of court custody and restraint could not be counted against the parties. Registration was therefore upheld and the challenge based on limitation failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 14 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171084