Kerala High Court Rules on Strict Adherence to Limitation Period in Arbitration Cases as per Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Kerala High Court rules: Section 5 of the Limitation Act doesn’t apply to Section 34 applications under the Arbitration Act. Emphasis on strict adherence to the four-month limitation period for challenging arbitral awards.

Delhi High Court Rules Email Delivery of Arbitral Awards Valid Under Arbitration Act.

Case Title: Mathew P J v M/S. Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co Ltd Court: Kerala High Court Date of Judgement: 19.12.2023

In the case of Mathew P J v. M/S. Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co Ltd the Hon’ble Kerala High Court has made a crucial ruling regarding the limitation period for challenging arbitral awards. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court has held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1963 (“Limitation Act”) is inapplicable for condoning delays in filing applications under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (“Arbitration Act”) since the Arbitration Act is a special statute.

The Hon’ble Court emphasized that Section 34 of the Arbitration Act specifies a maximum limitation period of four months to challenge an arbitral award. Consequently, any appeal filed beyond this period is barred by limitation and cannot be entertained. In the present case the appellants filed their arbitration appeal 1306 days after the stipulated period leading to the dismissal of their plea.

0 CommentsClose Comments

Leave a comment

Delhi High Court Rules Email Delivery of Arbitral Awards Valid Under Arbitration Act.

Case Title: Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports v. Ernst and Young Pvt Ltd1Court: Delhi High CourtDate of Judgment: 23.08.2023

The Delhi High Court recently passed a judgment that has affirmed that the delivery of arbitral awards via email is valid under the Arbitration Act.

In a recent decision, the Delhi High Court stated that the delivery of a scanned, signed copy of an arbitral award via email falls squarely within the ambit of valid delivery as stipulated under Section 31(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.This decision clearly delineates the legal standing of electronic delivery methods in arbitration proceedings.

The court specifically stated that “The law has to keep its pace in tandem with the developing technology. When service by email is an accepted mode of service, then sending scanned signed copy of the award/order of the Arbitral Tribunal to the parties would be a valid delivery as envisaged under Section 31(5) of the Arbitration Act.”