1

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9244 OF 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 23808/2019)

M/S N.V. INTERNATIONAL                           Appellant(s)

                               VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM & ORS.                        Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T     R.F. Nariman, J.

   1) Leave granted.

2) On the facts of the present case, an Arbitral Award dated

19.12.2006 was made by Justice K.N. Saikia, retired Judge of

this Court.  From this, a Section 34 petition was filed and

rejected by the District Judge, Kamrup, Gauhati on 30.05.2016.

An appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation

Act, 1996 was filed from this order in March, 2017, that is

after a delay of 189 days from the 90 days that were given

under Article 116 of the Limitation Act for filing such appeal.

By the impugned judgment dated 24.06.2019, this delay was, on

facts, not condoned as no sufficient cause was made out.    

3) Mr. Parthiv K. Goswami, learned advocate on behalf of the

appellant has argued before us that unlike Section 34, Section

37 does not exclude Section 5 of the Limitation Act, as a

result  of  which  even  if  the  90  day  period  is  over,  if  a

condonation  application  is  made  under  Section  5  of  the

Limitation  Act,  it  should  be  considered  on  its  own  merits

notwithstanding  the  length  of  delay.   Mr.  Shuvodeep  Roy,

2

learned counsel for the respondent supported the judgment under

appeal, stating that 189 days cannot be condoned as the object

of speedy resolution of disputes referred to arbitration would

be subverted.    

4) Having  heard  learned  counsel  for  both  sides,  we  may

observe that the matter is no longer res integra.  In SLP (C)

No. 23155/2013 [Union of India vs. Varindera Const. Ltd., this

Court, by its judgment and order dated 17.09.2018 held thus:

“Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties.

By a judgment dated 19.04.2018 in Civil Appeal Nos. 3994-3995 of 2018 [Union of India vs.  M/s Varindera  Constructions Ltd.  Etc.], this  Court has  in  near  identical  facts  and  circumstances allowed the appeal of the Union of India in a proceeding arising from an Arbitral Award.   

Ordinarily, we would have applied the said judgment to this case as well.  However, we find that the impugned Division Bench judgment dated 10.04.2013 has dismissed the appeal filed by the Union of India on the ground of delay.  The delay was found to be 142 days in filing the appeal and 103 days in refiling the appeal.  One of the important points made by the Division Bench is that,  apart  from  the  fact  that  there  is  no sufficient  cause  made  out  in  the  grounds  of delay, since a Section 34 application has to be filed  within  a  maximum  period  of  120  days including the grace period of 30 days, an appeal filed from the self-same proceeding under Section 37 should be covered by the same drill.    

Given the fact that an appellate proceeding is a continuation of the original proceeding, as has been held in  Lachmeshwar Prasad Shukul and Others vs. Keshwar Lal Chaudhuri and Others, AIR 1941 Federal Court 5, and repeatedly followed by our judgments, we feel that any delay beyond 120 days in the filing of an appeal under Section 37 from  an  application  being  either  dismissed  or allowed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 should not be allowed as it will defeat the overall statutory purpose of arbitration proceedings being decided with utmost

3

despatch.   

In this view of the matter, since even the original appeal was filed with a delay period of 142 days, we are not inclined to entertain these Special  Leave  Petitions  on  the  facts  of  this particular case.

The Special Leave Petitions stand disposed of accordingly.  

Pending  applications,  if  any,  also  stand disposed of.”

5) We may only add that what we have done in the aforesaid

judgment is to add to the period of 90 days, which is provided

by  statute  for  filing  of  appeals  under  Section  37  of  the

Arbitration Act, a grace period of 30 days under Section 5 of

the Limitation Act by following Lachmeshwar Prasad Shukul and

Others (supra), as also having regard to the object of speedy

resolution of all arbitral disputes which was uppermost in the

minds  of  the  framers  of  the  1996  Act,  and  which  has  been

strengthened from time to time by amendments made thereto.  The

present delay being beyond 120 days is not liable, therefore,

to be condoned.

6) Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

.......................... J.      (ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN)

    .......................... J.                (S. RAVINDRA BHAT)

New Delhi; December 06, 2019.