MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI vs MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED

Judgment text excerpt

$~O-46 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P. (COMM) 375/2025 Date of Decision: 13.10.2025 IN THE MATTER OF: MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER. HAVING ITS OFFICE AT: - DR. S.P. MUKHERJEE CIVIC CENTER, JLN MARG, NEW DELHI- 110002. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Gaganmeet Singh Sachdeva, Standing Counsel with Mr. Harshpreet Singh Chadha and Mr. Hridyesh Khanna, Advs. versus MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED HDIL-KALEDONIA, OFFICE NO.3., 6TH FLOOR, SAHAR ROAD, ANDHERI (EAST), MUMBAI-400069. .....Respondent Through: Mr. D. K. Rustogi, Ms. Anjali Pandey and Mr. Ujjwal Mishra, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV JUDGEMENT PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL) I.A. 23210/2025 (DELAY OF 139 DAYS IN FILLING THE PETITION) 1. The present petition is under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟), assailing the Arbitral Award dated 25.01.2025, read with Corrigendum dated 17.03.2025. 2. Undisputedly, the present petition has been filed with a delay. Thus, the instant application has been filed seeking condonation of the said delay. Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRIYA Signed Signing Date:25.10.2025 By:PURUSHAINDRA 16:50:10 KUMAR KAURAV 3. Mr. Gaganmeet Singh Sachdeva, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, was under a bona fide belief that the instant petition was filed on 15.07.2025, on the basis of the communication which was received by the erstwhile counsel who, unfortunately, has now passed away. 4. Irrefutably, it is the trite law that any delay beyond 120 days in filing an application under Section 34 of the Act cannot be condoned. The relevant extract of the aforesaid provision reads as u