VASISHTA MANTENA NH04 JV & ORS. vs BLACKLEAD INFRATECH PVT. LTD.

Judgment text excerpt

$~47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO(OS) (COMM) 288/2024 & CM APPL. 73709/2024 VASISHTA MANTENA NH04 JV & ORS. .....Appellants Through: Mr. Ashish Kothari, Adv. versus BLACKLEAD INFRATECH PVT. LTD. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Varun Shankar, Mr. Aryan Panwar, Mr. Anand Bhushan and Mr. Ahmed Alam, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL ORDER (ORAL) % 02.05.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Act1, assailing judgment dated 29 October 2024 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in OMP (Comm) 419/2023. 2. Given the limited scope of controversy, it is not necessary to delve deep into the facts. 3. Suffice it, therefore, to state that arbitral proceedings between the appellants and the respondent culminated in an award dated 24 1 “The 1996 Act” hereinafter Signature Not Verified FAO(OS) (COMM) 288/2024 Page 1 of 8 Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR Signing Date:05.05.2025 19:53:44 May 2023, which was adverse to the appellants. The appellants, therefore, challenged the said award by way of a petition under Section 34 of the 1996 Act. The purported Section 34 petition was first filed by the appellants before this Court on 21 August 2023. 65 pages were filed, without any documents and without any copy of the award under challenge. The said papers were returned under defects. The appellants filed the Section 34 petition with the award and with all documents on 25 September 2023. 4. The law with respect to Section 34 and limitation in that regard is well-settled. The Supreme Court has held, in UOI v Popular Construction2, that the normal period of three months and the extendable period of 30 days envisaged in Section 34(3)3 of the 1996 Act are non