2018 (8) TMI 2124

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Saurav Agrawal, Adv., Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR, Mr. Satyawan Shekhawat, Adv., Ms. Akanksha Sisodia, Adv. ORDER Having heard the learned counsel for both sides, a few facts first need to be stated. 2. In the present case, an Arbitral Award was delivered on 30.10.2015 and received by the respondent on 07.11.2015. An application to correct the said aforesaid Award....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....first date as, in fact, there was no correction made to the Award. 5. The respondent preferred an appeal before the High Court, whereby the learned Single Judge of the High Court, by his judgment dated 10.07.2017, reversed the order of the Additional District Judge stating that as the Section 33 application had been disposed of only on 14.12.2015, the period mentioned in Section 34(3) would sta....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....learned Single Judge held: "13. There is no justification, as contended, to accept the submission in view of the mandate of section 34 and considering the scheme and purpose of the Arbitration Act that because the application under section 33 of the Act was filed and it was rejected subsequently, therefore, the limitation period commenced afresh from the date of such decision of the award....