GOOD HEALTH AGRO TECH PVT LTD vs HALDIRAM SNACKS PVT LTD

Judgment text excerpt

$~52 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 25.02.2025 + FAO(OS) (COMM) 273/2024 GOOD HEALTH AGRO TECH PVT LTD .....Appellant Through: Ms.Liza Arora, Adv. versus HALDIRAM SNACKS PVT LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr.Varun Goswami, Mr.Naveen Grover, Mr.Hritik Chaudhary & Ms.Dakshita Sharma, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL) CM APPL. 68387/2024 (Exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. FAO(OS) (COMM) 273/2024 & CM APPL. 68388/2024 2. This appeal has been filed by the appellant, challenging the Order dated 29.08.2024, passed by the learned Single Judge in OMP (COMM) No. 397/2023 titled Haldiram Snacks Pvt. Ltd. v. Good Health Agro Tech Pvt. Ltd., dismissing the said petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short, ‘Act’) as being filed beyond the period of limitation, and even beyond the condonable period under Section 34(3) of the Act. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed FAO(OS) (COMM) 273/2024 Page 1 of 4 By:SUNIL Signing Date:01.03.2025 12:21:35 3. The learned Single Judge in the Impugned Order notes that the Impugned Award was received by the appellant on 31.03.2023, and even assuming that 25.07.2023 was the first filing of the petition, the same, being filed without the Arbitration Award, was a non est filing. All the documents, including the Impugned Arbitral Award, came to be first filed only on 22.09.2023, that is, beyond the period of limitation and the maximum condonable period. 4. In Pragati Construction Consultants v. Union of India & Anr., 2025 SCC OnLine Del 636, a Full Bench of this Court has held that filing of the Impugned Award is a mandatory requirement for considering the petition filed under Section 34 of t