KHABAR MEDIA CENTRE Vs. PURSHOTTAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 11/4/2023, the following position was recorded :

(2.) It is the contention of Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2, 3, 5 and 6 relying upon Chintels India Limited Vs. Bhayana Builders Private Limited 2021(4) SCC 602, para 21 that since the order refusing to condone the delay in filing an application for restoring the proceedings under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act results in confirming the dismissal in default of the application under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, what would lie would be an appeal under Sec. 37(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

(3.) In my considered opinion, the contention is misconceived for the reason that in Chintels India Limited Vs. Bhayana Builders (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court was considering a proposition where the application for condonation of delay was in filing an application under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, which in light of the provision of Sec. 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act have to be filed within the statutory period as indicated therein. It is in this context, it has been held that the refusal to condone the delay would result in refusal to set aside the arbitral Award as in such a case, the application under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act itself could not be heard.