Allowed

M/S. Omaxe New Chandigarh Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S. Flyboy Aviation Pvt. Ltd.

Arbitration – Section 34 petition – Limitation

Delhi HC10 Dec 2024FAO (COMM)/237/2024

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal against an order dismissing a Section 34 arbitration petition as barred by limitation. The respondent conceded that the appellant received the award on 14.01.2020, making the petition timely. The impugned order was set aside and the petition restored for expedited adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dismissing Section 34 petition set aside; petition restored to original number for expedited adjudication.

M/S. Omaxe New Chandigarh Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S. Flyboy… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~82

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

Date of decision: 10.12.2024

¶4

- FAO (COMM) 237/2024

¶5

M/S. OMAXE NEW CHANDIGARH DEVELOPERS PVT.

¶6

LTD.

¶7

.....Appellant Through: Mr. Ramesh Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mukti Bodh, Ms. Mala and Mr. Pavan Agarwal, Advs.

¶8

versus

¶9

M/S. FLYBOY AVIATION PVT. LTD.

¶10

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Nimish Chib and Ms. Divye Chugh, Advs.

¶11

CORAM:

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR

¶13

NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)

¶14

CM APPL. 72220/2024 (Exemption)

¶15

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶16

FAO (COMM) 237/2024, CM APPL. 72219/2024

¶17

This appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the Order dated 11.11.2024 passed by the learned District Judge (Commercial Courts)-05, South East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, in OMP (Comm.) No. 13/2020, titled M/s Omaxe New

¶18

Signature Not Verified

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

Digitally Signed FAO (COMM) 237/2024 By:NEELAM Signing Da te:3 0.01.2025 18:13:48

¶21

Chandigarh Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s Flyboy Aviation Pvt. Ltd., dismissing the said petition filed by the appellant herein under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (herein referred as ‘Act’) as being barred by limitation under Section 34(3) of the Act.

¶22

The learned Senior Counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Arbitrator had forwarded the Arbitral Award to the appellant at their old registered address in Jaipur, which was provided by the respondent. However, the appellant had long shifted out from the said address and was not available at the given address on the date of sending the Award. Therefore, the copy of the Award was never received by the appellant. He submits that it was only upon the receipt of notice of the Execution Petition at its new registered address of the appellant at New Delhi, that the appellant became aware of the passing of the Arbitral Award. He submits that the address of the appellant at New Delhi was always in the knowledge of the respondent, however, the same was not disclosed to the learned Arbitrator despite the learned Arbitrator seeking the same. He submits that after gaining knowledge of the passing of the Award, the appellant contacted the learned Arbitrator and obtained a signed copy of the Arbitral Award on 14.01.2020, and subsequently, filed the above-mentioned petition. He submits that even taking the limitation to start from the date of knowledge through the Execution Petition, the petition filed under Section 34 of the Act was within the prescribed period.

¶23

The learned counsel for the respondent, who appears on advance notice submits that, without in any manner admitting to the

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Page 2 of 3

¶26

Digitally Signed FAO (COMM) 237/2024 By:NEELAM Signing Da te:3 0.01.2025 18:13:48

¶27

contents of the appeal, and solely to expedite the final adjudication of the petition filed under Section 34 of the Act by the appellant, the respondent would concede that the signed copy of the Award was received by the appellant only on 14.01.2020. Therefore, the petition filed under Section 34 of the Act was within the time prescribed under Section 34(3) of the Act.

¶28

In view of the above concession, the appeal is allowed. The Impugned Order dated 11.11.2024 is set aside. The petition filed by the appellant under Section 34 of the Act, being OMP (Comm.) No. 13/2020, is restored to its original number. The learned District Judge (Commercial Courts) is requested to expedite the adjudication thereof. The parties shall appear before the learned District Judge (Commercial Courts)-05, South East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, on 14^th January, 2025. We make it clear that no further notice of the hearing is required to be issued to the parties, as they are appearing before us and have been informed of the next date of hearing. We further clarify that we have not made any observations on the merits of the petition filed by the appellant before the learned District Judge.

¶29

NAVIN CHAWLA, J

¶30

SHALINDER KAUR, J

¶31

DECEMBER 10, 2024 /ss/sk

¶32

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶33

Signature Not Verified

¶34

Page 3 of 3

¶35

Digitally Signed FAO (COMM) 237/2024 By:NEELAM Signing Da te:3 0.01.2025 18:13:48

M/S. Omaxe New Chandigarh Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S. Flyboy Aviation Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Omaxe New Chandigarh Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S. Flyboy Aviation Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yadav Exhibitors (P) Limited Vs Karur Vysya Bank Limited

Union of India and Ors. Vs Ex Sgt Anil Sharma (Retd)

Anil Kumar Vs Union of India

Ex Rect Bhuw Aneshw Ar Sah Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ex Swr Rohtash Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.

Anuraag Jasraaj Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.