https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279516 Delay beyond the additional thirty-day period for filing objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 cannot be condoned by invoking the Limitation Act, because the statute fixes an outer limit that cannot be enlarged. The article also notes that limitation for challenging an award begins only on proper delivery of a signed copy under Section 31(5); indirect knowledge or defective service does not start time running. On the stated facts, there was no reliable proof of duly served delivery, so the objection period had not commenced and the challenge could not be treated as time-barred. en-us Wed, 18 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Mar 2019 14:19:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279516 Delay beyond the additional thirty-day period for filing objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 cannot be condoned by invoking the Limitation Act, because the statute fixes an outer limit that cannot be enlarged. The article also notes that limitation for challenging an award begins only on proper delivery of a signed copy under Section 31(5); indirect knowledge or defective service does not start time running. On the stated facts, there was no reliable proof of duly served delivery, so the objection period had not commenced and the challenge could not be treated as time-barred. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 18 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279516