https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450340 The SC held that the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to applications under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, with a three-year limitation period starting from when the right to apply accrues. The petitioner's request for appointment of an arbitrator was within this period and thus not barred by limitation. The court further held that claims cannot be refused arbitration merely for being ex-facie time-barred; the claims here were not dead on the date arbitration commenced. Applying a two-pronged test-whether the Section 11(6) petition is barred by limitation and whether the claims are ex-facie time-barred-the court found both in favor of the petitioner. Consequently, the petition for appointment of an arbitrator was allowed, and a former SC judge was appointed sole arbitrator. en-us Fri, 01 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Aug 2025 12:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450340 The SC held that the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to applications under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, with a three-year limitation period starting from when the right to apply accrues. The petitioner's request for appointment of an arbitrator was within this period and thus not barred by limitation. The court further held that claims cannot be refused arbitration merely for being ex-facie time-barred; the claims here were not dead on the date arbitration commenced. Applying a two-pronged test-whether the Section 11(6) petition is barred by limitation and whether the claims are ex-facie time-barred-the court found both in favor of the petitioner. Consequently, the petition for appointment of an arbitrator was allowed, and a former SC judge was appointed sole arbitrator. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 01 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450340