The Supreme Court is slated to examine whether delay beyond the period of 120 days in preferring an appeal under Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (1996 act) can be condoned/ excused by courts [M/S Sab Industries Limited v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Another].
A division bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal on Wednesday observed that the decision in the 2020 case of Union of India v. Varindera Constructions Limited, which bars condonation of delay, might require reconsideration.
The Court, therefore, issued notice on a plea preferred by M/S Sab Industries Limited (appellant) challenging an order of the Himachal Pradesh High Court condoning a delay of 166 days by the State in filing appeal under Section 37 of the Act.
Before the top court, the appellant placed reliance on the decision in Varindera Constructions Limited to argue that delay beyond period of 120 days in preferring an appeal under Section 37 cannot be condoned.
Taking note of limitation aspect under Section 43 of the Act, the Court was of the view that the decision in Varindera Constructions may require reconsideration.
"Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner places reliance on a decision of this Court in the case of Union of India vs. Varindera Constructions Ltd., (2020) 2 SCC 111. This judgment takes a view that the delay beyond the period of 120 days in preferring an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 cannot be condoned. Prima facie, it appears to us that in view of Section 43 of the 1996 Act, the said view may require reconsideration," the Court said while posting the matter for further hearing on October 21.
On August 5, a division bench of the High Court had condoned the delay of 166 days by the State in preferring an appeal under Section 37 against a judgment of the single-judge.
It was argued before the High Court that the delay was due to certified copy of judgment being delivered to a different department which subsequently led to the mix-up.
Taking note of this, the High Court had proceeded to condone the delay subject to payment of costs of ₹10,000 by the State.
Aggrieved, the appellant moved the apex court.
Advocates Tarun Gupta, Hirday Virdi and Sidhant Ranta appeared for the appellant.
[Read Order]