{"id":316230,"date":"2024-03-06T16:00:19","date_gmt":"2024-03-06T10:30:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=316230"},"modified":"2024-03-06T15:35:30","modified_gmt":"2024-03-06T10:05:30","slug":"3-years-long-period-filing-application-appointing-arbitrator-supreme-court-suggests-parliament-bring-amendment-prescribing-limitation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/06\/3-years-long-period-filing-application-appointing-arbitrator-supreme-court-suggests-parliament-bring-amendment-prescribing-limitation\/","title":{"rendered":"\u20183 years is a long period for filing application for appointing arbitrator\u2019; SC suggests Parliament to bring amendment prescribing specific limitation period"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court:<\/span> In an arbitration petition under Section 11(6)<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (‘the Act, 1996’) filed at the instance of a company based in Kabul, Afghanistan and engaged in the business of providing training to desirous students in computer education, English language, information technology, etc. praying for the appointment of an arbitrator for the adjudication of disputes and claims arising from the Contract dated 21-03-2013 entered between the petitioner and the respondent, the three Judge Bench Dr. DY. Chandrachud, CJI, J.B. Pardiwala*<\/span> and Manoj Misra, JJ. has held that the present arbitration petition having been filed within a period of three years from the date when the respondent failed to comply with the notice of invocation of arbitration issued by the petitioner is not hit by limitation. Further, the notice for invocation of arbitration having been issued by the petitioner within a period of three years from the date of accrual of cause of action, the claims cannot be said to be ex-facie dead or time-barred on the date of commencement of the arbitration proceedings.<\/p>\n

Issues:<\/p>\n