Stay abreast with the latest developments in the professional domain along with in-depth analysis through the monthly BCA Journal. Get access to an engaging library of researched publications from the BCAS stable.
Learn MoreBCAJ Brieficles are short-format, web-only articles on contemporary topics of professional importance that are open-for-all to read & share.
Explore BrieficlesExplore past issues of BCA Journal & indulge in a treasure trove of high-quality professional content across format of print, videos & learning events from the BCAS stable.
Learn MoreMonthly mouth-piece of BCAS, the BCA Journal is a leading publication that has been in continuous circulation for more than 55 years. Over the years the BCAJ has become synonymous with high-quality & authentic content across fields of finance, accounting, tax & regulatory matters. The BCAJ has wide circulation across India & commands huge respect amongst the Chartered Accountants` community.
Learn MoreFor queries, collaborations, and insights to forge, Drop a line, share thoughts, inquiries galore, At BCAJ, your messages, we eagerly explore.
Learn More16 Union of India vs. M/s. GR - Gawa R (JV) 2025 Live Law (Del) 565 April 24, 2025
Arbitration - Condonation of delay – Basic documents like impugned order not attached – Application filed only to circumvent limitation period without filing all the enclosures / documents – Application non-est in the eyes of the law. [S. 34(3), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996].
FACTS
An arbitral award was passed in favour of the Respondent on January 3, 2024, and was subsequently modified through a corrigendum dated March 2, 2024. The Applicant challenged the said award on June 20, 2024, with a delay of 18 days beyond the prescribed limitation period. The Respondent, however, contended that although the delay appeared to be of only 18 days, the initial filing by the Applicant was deliberately made without attaching essential documents such as the impugned arbitral award, e-court fee receipt, one-time process fee, affidavit of service, and other requisite enclosures. It was argued that such a filing was not merely defective but was a strategic attempt to circumvent the limitation period, and therefore, the application should be treated as non-est in the eyes of law. The Respondent also highlighted that the initial filing comprised only 146 pages, whereas