https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185270 Objections to an arbitral award filed within the outer period under the proviso to Section 34(3) were treated as within limitation where they were returned only for formal defects in vakalatnama and caveat particulars. Those defects were not substantive, so re-presentation after curing them related back to the original filing and did not defeat limitation. The Court also accepted sufficient cause on the basis of a bona fide belief that the dispute was governed by the Arbitration Act, 1940, supported by earlier proceedings under Section 14, an appeal, and an SLP. On that basis, the objections were entertained under the extended period and the applications were allowed. en-us Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Aug 2016 16:36:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185270 Objections to an arbitral award filed within the outer period under the proviso to Section 34(3) were treated as within limitation where they were returned only for formal defects in vakalatnama and caveat particulars. Those defects were not substantive, so re-presentation after curing them related back to the original filing and did not defeat limitation. The Court also accepted sufficient cause on the basis of a bona fide belief that the dispute was governed by the Arbitration Act, 1940, supported by earlier proceedings under Section 14, an appeal, and an SLP. On that basis, the objections were entertained under the extended period and the applications were allowed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185270