limitation period commencing from 19th July, 2022, when they received the certified copy of the award. There is no concept of an institution certifying an award, and neither is there any requirement of a certified copy mentioned in the Act. The only requirement in this regard is that a signed copy of the award must be communicated to the parties, which in this case was already done on 1st June, 2022. Moreover, it must be noted that the communication issued by SCOPE directing payment of the balance amount was issued on 7th June, 2022, being prior to the passing of the Dissenting Opinion. This in itself indicates that the award had already been finalised on 1st June, 2022. Furthermore, while the Respondent had promptly cleared their dues on 18th June, 2022 and received the certified copy of the award on 22nd June, 2022, the Petitioner unnecessarily and unreasonably delayed in applying for the certified copy, only making the payment on 12/14th July, 2022, five weeks after receiving the communication from SCOPE. The Petitioner cannot be permitted to take advantage of their own delay by creating a false basis to calculate the period of limitation from 19th July, 2022. Thus, SCOPE’s letter dated 7th June, 2022 has no significance regarding the period of limitation and only relates to payments of fees and expenses of SCOPE. 6.7. In view of the aforenoted contentions and caselaw, it is submitted that the arbitral award is that of the majority, which was made and delivered to the parties on 1st June, 2022, in accordance with law. Thus, the period of limitation would run from the same date. Considering the excessive delay in filing the instant petition and absence of sufficient cause for the same, the Court must dismiss the present application.
