Delhi High Court - Orders
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd vs Rukma Decor And Construction Co on 13 March, 2024
Author: Jasmeet Singh
Bench: Jasmeet Singh
$~29
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ O.M.P. (COMM) 84/2023, I.A. 3463/2023, I.A. 3464/2023,
MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ashish Dholakia, Sr. Adv. with
Ms. Suruchi Suri, Adv.
versus
RUKMA DECOR AND CONSTRUCTION CO ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Navneet Dugar, Mr. Manoj
Kumar, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH
ORDER
% 13.03.2024 I.A. 3465/2023
1. This is an application under Section 14 read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay of 757 days in filing the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
2. The reply has been filed but the same is under objections. Copy of the reply has been given in Court today.
3. Mr. Dholakia, learned senior counsel for the petitioner states that in the present case, in fact, there is no delay but the application has been filed by way of abundant caution. The same is disputed by Mr. Dugar, learned counsel for the respondent.
4. The facts in the present case are that an award was passed on 10.06.2020, which was subsequently modified on 05.08.2020. On 03.12.2020, the petitioner filed its objections before the Commercial Court, This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/03/2024 at 20:47:52 Tis Hazari Courts within 120 days.
5. Since the objections which were filed were filed before the wrong forum, the petitioner sought liberty and withdrew the objections with liberty to file the same afresh before the competent court in accordance with law.
6. Pursuant to the said liberty, the present objections have been filed on 03.02.2023.
7. It is stated by Mr. Dugar, learned counsel for the respondent that the petition is barred by limitation as it has been filed beyond 120 days of passing of the award.
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s Arif Axim Co. Ltd. vs. M/s Aptech Ltd. 2024 INSC 155 has held as under:
"82. Thus, in ordinary circumstances, the limitation period available to the petitioner for raising a claim would have come to an end after an expiry of three years, that is, on 27.03.2021. However, in March 2020, the entire world was taken under the grip of the deadly Covid-19 pandemic bringing everyday life and commercial activity to a complete halt across the globe. Taking cognisance of this unfortunate turn of events, this Court vide order dated 23.03.2020 passed in Suo Motu Civil Writ Petition No. 03/2020 directed the period commencing from 15.03.2020 to be excluded for the purposes of computation of limitation. The said extension of limitation was extended from time to time by this Court in view of the continuing pandemic. As a result, the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 was finally determined to be excluded for the computation of limitation. It was provided that the balance period of limitation as available on 15.03.2020 would become available from 01.03.2022. Operative part of the order dated 10.01.2022 is extracted hereinbelow:
"5. Taking into consideration the arguments advanced by learned counsel and the impact of the surge of the virus on public health and adversities faced by litigants in the prevailing conditions, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/03/2024 at 20:47:52 M.A. No. 21 of 2022 with the following directions:
I. The order dated 23.03.2020 is restored and in continuation of the subsequent orders dated 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021, it is directed that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi judicial proceedings.
II. Consequently, the balance period of limitation remaining as on 03.10.2021, if any, shall become available with effect from 01.03.2022.
III. In cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 01.03.2022. In the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 01.03.2022 is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply.
IV. It is further clarified that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Sections 23 (4) and 294 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings."
83. The operation and effect of the aforesaid order was considered and explained by a two-Judge Bench of this Court in Prakash Corporates v. Dee Vee Projects Ltd., reported in (2022) 5 SCC 112 as follows:
"28. As regards the operation and effect of the orders passed by this Court in SMWP No. 3 of 2020, noticeable it is that even though in the initial order dated 23-3-2020 [Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re, (2020) 19 SCC 10: (2021) 3 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/03/2024 at 20:47:53 SCC (Cri) 801], this Court provided that the period of limitation in all the proceedings, irrespective of that prescribed under general or special laws, whether condonable or not, shall stand extended w.e.f. 15-3-2020 but, while concluding the matter on 23-9-2021 (Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re, (2021) 18 SCC 250: 2021 SCC OnLine SC 947], this Court specifically provided for exclusion of the period from 15-3-2020 till 2-10-2021. A look at the scheme of the Limitation Act, 1963 makes it clear that while extension of prescribed period in relation to an appeal or certain applications has been envisaged under Section 5, the exclusion of time has been provided in the provisions like Sections 12 to 15 thereof. When a particular period is to be excluded in relation to any suit or proceeding, essentially the reason is that such a period is accepted by law to be the one not referable to any indolence on the part of the litigant, but being relatable to either the force of circumstances or other requirements of law (like that of mandatory two months' notice for a suit against the Government [Vide Section 15 of the Limitation Act, 1963.1). The excluded period, as a necessary consequence, results in enlargement of time, over and above the period prescribed."
(emphasis supplied)
84. The effect of the above-referred order of this Court in the facts of the present case is that the balance limitation left on 15.03.2020 would become available w.e.f. 01.03.2022. The balance period of limitation remaining on 15.03.2020 can be calculated by computing the number of days between 15.03.2020 and 27.03.2021, which is the day when the limitation period would have come to an end under ordinary circumstances. The balance period thus comes to 1 year 13 days. This period of 1 year 13 days becomes available to the petitioner from 01.03.2022, thereby meaning that the limitation period available to the petitioner for invoking arbitration proceedings would have come to an end on 13.03.2023."
9. A perusal of the paragraphs quoted above show that the period from 15.03.2020 to 01.03.2022 is to be excluded for the calculation of the period This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/03/2024 at 20:47:54 of limitation.
10. Once the same is considered, the objections filed by the petitioner is within 90 days of the withdrawal.
11. For the said reasons, the application is allowed and the delay of 757 is condoned.
O.M.P. (COMM) 84/2023
12. Mr. Dholakia, learned senior counsel for the petitioner states that he would like to narrow down his objections to the claims.
13. At his request, re-notify on 22.07.2024.
JASMEET SINGH, J MARCH 13, 2024/DM Click here to check corrigendum, if any This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/03/2024 at 20:47:54