Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Arb.O.P.(Com.Div.)Nos.646 & 647 of 2022

25. On 13.04.2018, the Respondent filed its Rejoinder and Reply to the Statement of Defence/Counter Claims of the petitioner and later the Petitioner filed its Reply to the Rejoinder filed by the Respondent on 14.05.2018.

26. Thus, the pleadings were completed on 14.05.2018. By this time Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 had been inserted vide Act 3 of 2016 with retrospective effect from 23.10.2015. As per the provision as it during the material time, the Award had to be passed within 12 months from the date of the Arbitrator or the Arbitral Tribunal entering upon reference to the dispute.

74. However, in the present case, the pleading were completed on 14.05.2018. Ordinarily, the Award should have been passed within a period of twelve months thereafter on 03.05.2019 as per the amended Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as it stood then. As per the provision as it during the material time, the Award had to be passed within twelve months from the date of the arbitrator entering upon reference.

75. In this case, the arbitrator entered upon reference on 09.01.2018. Therefore, the Award should have been passed latest by 08.01.2019. During the interregnum applications were filed as mentioned above and _____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb.O.P.(Com.Div.)Nos.646 & 647 of 2022 time was extended by this Court. During the interregnum Section 29-A was also amended vide Act 33 of 2019 with effect from 30.08.2019. Thus, the timelines for passing awards changed due to statutory interventions.