Delay of 1011 days condoned by Andhra Pradesh HC! What a grave error, holds Supreme Court
Supreme Court: In a case where the Andhra Pradesh High Court had condoned a delay of 1011 days even though no sufficient
limitation
Judgment on Admissions | Is Court justified in allowing application under Or. 12 R. 6 CPC for absence of material pleadings, presence of moonshine defence in WS? Del HC discusses
Delhi High Court: Asha Menon, J., held that, “Mere fact that the boundary walls had been built by the defendants cannot be
CESTAT | Rejection of refund on the ground of limitation not justified; Appeal allowed
Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): Sulekha Beevi C.S., J. (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal wherein the refund was rejected
Consumer Protection| Can written statement be accepted beyond 45 days? SC settles pre and post New India Assurance Company Verdict conundrum once and for all
The Supreme Court adopted a bright-line standard which obviates uncertainty on the legal position before the consumer fora and obviates further litigation.
‘Acquiescence virtually destroys the right of the person’. SC distinguishes acquiescence from delay and laches
Supreme Court: Explaining the difference between acquiescence and delay and laches, the bench of L. Nageswara Rao and Sanjiv Khanna*, JJ has
Law on appointment of arbitrator | What happens if parties fail to agree on arbitrator within 30 days from receipt of request by one party? Del HC explains
Delhi High Court: Sanjeev Narula, J., allowed an arbitration petition by appointing a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the contesting parties.
Land Acquisition| Applying 2-year limitation period as per Section 11A of 1894 Act for passing award in pending cases under Section 24(1)(a) of the 2013 Act impractical: SC
Supreme Court: In an important ruling on Land Acquisition and Requisition law, the bench of AM Khanwilkar and Sanjiv Khanna*, JJ has
Explained| Section 263 of Income Tax Act: Date of order or receipt of order – When does the limitation clock starts ticking?
Supreme Court: Interpreting Section 263(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the bench of MR Shah* and AS Bopanna, JJ has held that receipt
IBC and Limitation| Words “order is made available to the aggrieved party” consciously omitted from Section 61(1)&(2): SC. Read why
“The IBC, as a prescriptive mechanism, affecting rights of stakeholders who are not necessarily parties to the proceedings, mandates diligence on the part of applicants who are aggrieved by the outcome of their litigation.”
CESTAT | Amount claimed as refund already debited in Returns, whether there would be entitlement for refund under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004? Tribunal answers
Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): P Dinesha (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal in which the Tribunal had to decide
Whether limitation falls within the power of the Arbitral tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction – RF Nariman’s judgment in Indian Farmers case
by Hiroo Advani† and Manav Nagpal††
Cite as: 2021 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 73
Exploring Arbitration Claims through the Lens of Law of Limitation: A comprehensive analysis
by Tariq Khan†
Cite as: 2021 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 71
Jhar HC | S. 106 of the Factories Act is of mandatory nature, courts cannot condone delay; Says HC
Jharkhand High Court: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J., held that Section 106 of the Factories Act is mandatory in nature and the Courts
No bar to amendment of S. 7 IBC petition until final order; Money decree, recovery certificate in financial creditor’s favour gives fresh cause of action to initiate corporate insolvency resolution process: SC
Supreme Court: A Division Bench of Indira Banerjee and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ. held that there is no bar in law to amendment
Bom HC | Concept of ‘continuing offences’ & limitation under Domestic Violence Act: Explained
Bombay High Court: Manish Pitale, J., while upholding the decision of Sessions Court discussed more on the concept of ‘continuing offence’ under
Interplay of IB Code with Law on Limitation – The Consistent “Inconsistency” – Part III
by Akaant Kumar Mittal†
Cite as: 2021 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 46
Interplay of IB Code with Law on Limitation – Putting to Rest Section 18 Dilemma – Part II
by Akaant Kumar Mittal†
Cite as: 2021 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 33
Chh HC | Legislature does not prescribe limitation with the object of destroying the rights of parties; Word “sufficient cause” to be given liberal construction
Chhattisgarh High Court: Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant, J., allowed the petition and set aside the impugned order. The facts of the case
Short delay in filing appeals under section 37 of the Arbitration Act can be condoned in exceptional cases. Here’s why Supreme Court overruled N.V. International verdict
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of RF Nariman, BR Gavai and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ has held that given the object of speedy
3 years’ limitation period ‘unduly long’; Necessary for Parliament to fill the vacuum by prescribing a specific period of limitation under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation 1996: SC
3 years is an unduly long period for filing an application under Section 11, since it would defeat the very object of the Act, which provides for expeditious resolution of commercial disputes within a time bound period.