TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 1366X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the objections Under Section 34 of the Act. It was submitted on behalf of the Respondent that Rule 5(3) of the Delhi High Court Rules states that if the Memorandum of Appeal is filed and particular time is granted by the Deputy Registrar, it shall be considered as fresh institution. If this Rule is strictly applied in this case, it would mean that any re-filing beyond 7 days would be a fresh inst ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Leave granted. The Appellant is aggrieved by the decision of the Delhi High Court dated 1.9.2015 in F.A.O.(OS) No. 436 of 2015 refusing to condone a period of 65 days in re-filing the objections Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'Act'). The Award was delivered on 29.10.2012. Admittedly, the objections Under Section 34 were filed within the time sti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eyond the period stipulated therein. The said sub-section reads as follows: 34. (3) An application for setting aside may not be made after three months have elapsed from the date on which the party making that Application had received the Arbitral Award or, if a request had been made Under Section 33, from the date on which that request had been disposed of by the Arbitral Tribunal: Provided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecord that 5 extensions were given beyond 7 days. Undoubtedly, at the end of the extensions, it would amount to re-filing. 3. We are not inclined to accept this contention particularly since the Petitioner has offered an explanation for the delay for the period after the extensions. 4. Having regard to the overall circumstances of the case, we consider it appropriate in the interest of justi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
