<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (9) TMI 169 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385401</link>
    <description>For an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the limitation period runs for three years from the date the cause of action first arises, applying Article 137 of the Limitation Act. The date of commencement of arbitral proceedings is when the request for reference to arbitration is received by the respondent, and later reminders or correspondence do not extend time unless the record shows a bona fide negotiation history and a real breaking point delaying invocation. On the facts noted, the final bills had become due long before the arbitration notice was served, and the asserted negotiation history was not established, so the claim was treated as time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 May 2026 11:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=586058" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 169 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385401</link>
      <description>For an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the limitation period runs for three years from the date the cause of action first arises, applying Article 137 of the Limitation Act. The date of commencement of arbitral proceedings is when the request for reference to arbitration is received by the respondent, and later reminders or correspondence do not extend time unless the record shows a bona fide negotiation history and a real breaking point delaying invocation. On the facts noted, the final bills had become due long before the arbitration notice was served, and the asserted negotiation history was not established, so the claim was treated as time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385401</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>