https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196726 The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision to dismiss the application for setting aside an award as time-barred. The key issue was the interpretation of the term "notice" under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act. The Court emphasized that the notice could be communicated orally and that the crucial aspect was the Court's communication of the filing of the award to the parties. Both Courts found that the notice had been served before the deadline, leading to the conclusion that the application was indeed time-barred. The Court clarified that formal service of notice by the Court was mandatory for compliance with statutory requirements. en-us Thu, 04 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Dec 2017 10:41:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196726 The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision to dismiss the application for setting aside an award as time-barred. The key issue was the interpretation of the term "notice" under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act. The Court emphasized that the notice could be communicated orally and that the crucial aspect was the Court's communication of the filing of the award to the parties. Both Courts found that the notice had been served before the deadline, leading to the conclusion that the application was indeed time-barred. The Court clarified that formal service of notice by the Court was mandatory for compliance with statutory requirements. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 04 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196726