SC:No Intra-Court Appeal Against Condonation Of Delay By The Single Judge In Plea To Set Aside Arbitration Award, National : Today Indya

Latest News

Home
SC:No Intra-Court Appeal Against Condonation Of Delay By The Single Judge In Plea To Set Aside Arbitration Award

SC:No Intra-Court Appeal Against Condonation Of Delay By The Single Judge In Plea To Set Aside Arbitration Award

Thursday, April 20, 2017 IST

The Supreme Court, in Union of India vs M/S Simplex Infrastructures, has reiterated that intra-court legal instrument charm beneath clause fifteen of the legal instrument of court at city isn't reparable against AN order gone by the one choose on AN application for pardon of delay filed in conjunction with the petition for setting aside AN arbitration award A division bench of city court, holding that intra-court charm is reparable against single choose order condoning the delay, had reversed the order by invoking its jurisdiction beneath legal instrument charm.

Referring to the choice in Fuerst Day Lawson restricted vs Jindal Exports restricted, the bench comprising Justice Dipak Misra and Justice AM Khanwilkar command that the remedy of legal instrument charm against that call is unavailable and also the question as-as to whether the one choose had justly exercised the discretion or otherwise may well be assailed before the apex court by approach of special leave petition.

Even if the learned single choose might have committed manifest error or wrong set the appliance for a pardon of delay, that judgment is imputable to exercise jurisdiction under Section 34(3) of the Act,” the bench said.

The court also noted that that remedy of appeal has been provided only against an order of setting aside or refusing to set aside an arbitral award under Section 34(1) (c) and no appeal is provided against an order passed by the court of competent jurisdiction condoning the delay in filing the petition under Section 34 of the Act as such .

The bench also disapproved of the ratio in the high court judgment, which had distinguished the decision in Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd by holding that the judgment of the single judge of condoning the delay in filing of the petition under Section 34 of the Act was without jurisdiction and not in terms of the provisions of the Act.

“It is not possible to countenance this approach,” the bench said allowing the appeal against the division bench order.