1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today. Taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Navneet Chandra Tripathi, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Raghav Dev Garg, learned counsel of the respondents.
3. Present appeal has been filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') against the order dated 30.05.2019 passed by the District Judge, Allahabad in Arbitration Case No. 1 of 2002. By that order, the learned District Judge, Allahabad has allowed the objection raised by respondents under Section 34 of the Act and set aside the award dated 13.09.2001.
4. Present appeal has been presented to this Court carrying a delay of 76 days as reported. Perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application reveals that certified copy of the order dated 30.05.2019 was first received by the appellant on 24.07.2019 through its counsel. That fact has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application. Computed therefrom, the limitation of 90 days to file the present appeal expired on 22.10.2019. A further period of 30 days for which delay may have been condoned expired on 21.11.2019.
5. Undisputedly, the present appeal was first presented before this Court on 06.01.2020 i.e. one and half months thereafter. It is wholly beyond time.
6. In M/s N.V. International Vs. The State of Assam & Ors.; (2020) 2 SCC 109, the Supreme Court followed its earlier decision in Union of India Vs. Varindera Construction Ltd. passed in SLP (C) No. 23155 of 2013, decided on 17.09.2018. Following that decision, the Supreme Court has observed as under:
"5. We may only add that what we have done in the aforesaid judgment is to add to the period of 90 days, which is provided by statute for filing of appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act, a grace period of 30 days under Section 5 of the Limitation Act by following Lachmeshwar Prasad Shukul & Ors. (supra), as also having regard to the object of speedy resolution of all arbitral disputes which was uppermost in the minds of the framers of the 1996 Act, and which has been strengthened from time to time by amendments made thereto. The present delay being beyond 120 days is not liable, therefore, to be condoned.
6. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed."
7. In view of the facts noted above and no contrary law having been shown by the appellants, the present appeal is wholly beyond limitation prescribed. The delay is beyond the limit of condonation. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 19.2.2021 Abhilash