especially in view of law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case referred to supra. The limitation for assailing the award passed under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is three months as from the date on which the party filing application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act has received the arbitral award. Extendable period of 30 days referred to in the proviso to Section 34 (3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is not the period of limitation. Therefore, if a party has to get the benefit of limitation on account of vacations in a Court, then, the condition precedent for that is that this period of “three months” must expire during the vacations. In other words, it is not the extendable period, which should expire during the limitation, but the period of three months which should expire during the period of vacation. In the present case, the period of three months as from the date when signed copy of the award was received by the appellant, expired before the learned Court below closed for winter vacations. This is not in dispute. That being the case, as the limitation for filing the Objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, had expired before the Courts closed for vacations and it is the extendable period, which expired during the period of vacations, the appellant herein was not entitled for the benefit of Section 4 of the Limitation Act.
