https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421366 The Supreme Court upheld the Calcutta High Court's decision to dismiss an arbitration petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as time-barred. The appellant's claim for additional payment for work done in 1986 was deemed stale due to a significant delay in invoking arbitration. The Court rejected the argument that the limitation period starts after serving a legal notice, emphasizing the long delay in initiating arbitration. Citing a precedent, the Court found no error in the High Court's decision, ruling the appeal as meritless and ordering no costs to be paid. en-us Thu, 21 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 Apr 2022 08:32:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421366 The Supreme Court upheld the Calcutta High Court's decision to dismiss an arbitration petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as time-barred. The appellant's claim for additional payment for work done in 1986 was deemed stale due to a significant delay in invoking arbitration. The Court rejected the argument that the limitation period starts after serving a legal notice, emphasizing the long delay in initiating arbitration. Citing a precedent, the Court found no error in the High Court's decision, ruling the appeal as meritless and ordering no costs to be paid. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 21 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421366