COMMISSIONER Vs. B.K. GANGADHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr.D.N.Nanjunda Reddy, learned Senior counsel for the appellants. Mr.Udaya Holla, learned Senior counsel for the respondent No.1. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is heard finally. In this appeal filed under Sec. 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short), the appellants have assailed the validity of the judgment dated 07.09.2019 passed by the Commercial Court by which objections preferred by the appellants has been dismissed as barred by limitation.

(2.) Facts leading to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the parties have entered into a contract which contained an arbitration clause for resolution of the dispute. The respondent No.2 was appointed as a sole arbitrator on 22/9/2017 to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. The arbitrator passed an award on 05.11.2018 and awarded a sum of Rs.10,81,28,458.00 as compensation against the appellants. The aforesaid award was served on the appellants on 13/11/2018. However, after a period of 157 days, the appellants filed an application under Sec. 34 of the Act on 19/7/2019. Along with the aforesaid application, the appellants filed an application under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act. The Commercial Court, by judgment dated 07/9/2019, inter alia held that it has no power to condone the delay beyond the period of 120 days.

(3.) We have heard the learned Senior counsel for the parties at length. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in 'SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA' (2019) 2 SCC 455 , it is evident that the Court has no power to condone the delay beyond the period of 120 days.