Kirpal Singh Vs. Government of India, New Delhi & Ors

  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Publications
  4. /
  5. Case Snippets
  6. /
  7. Kirpal Singh Vs....

In Kirpal Singh v. Government of India, New Delhi & Ors, the Supreme Court condoned a 126-day delay in filing an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, holding that Section 14 of the Limitation Act, which excludes time spent before courts without jurisdiction, applies to Section 34. The appellant initially filed a regular first appeal before the High Court, but upon recognizing the proper remedy under Section 34, approached the District Court on 23.02.2012, where the application was dismissed as time-barred. The apex court, relying on Consolidated Engineering Enterprises v. Principal Secretary, 2008 (7) SCC 169, reaffirmed that the Arbitration Act does not exclude Section 14 of the Limitation Act and emphasized a liberal interpretation of limitation provisions to ensure access to statutory remedies under Sections 34 and 37. Consequently, the Court allowed the appellant’s challenge to the arbitral award.

Tags:

Let us help you!

If you need any help, please feel free to contact us. We will get back to you within one business day. Alternatively, if you're in a hurry, you can call us now

+91 9052538538
info@karavadi.in

Recent Case Snippets

Youth Bar Association Vs. Union of India, W.P.(CRL.) NO.68 of 2016

The Hon’ble Supreme Court while dealing with a Writ Petition in this landmark decision issued a slew of directions to make First Information Reports (FIRs) available to the accused and the public at large. The Hon’ble Court directed that all police stations shall upload FIRs within 24 hours except in cases of sensitive nature involving... Read more » Read more »

Supreme Court Upholds Post-Delivery Penalty for Mis declared Goods by Railways

In Union of India v. M/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. (2025 INSC 805), the Supreme Court held that Indian Railways can recover penalties for misdeclared consignments even after delivery under Section 66 of the Railways Act, 1989. Overturning the Gauhati High Court, it clarified that the law sets no time limit for such recovery, and... Read more » Read more »

BCCI v. Deccan Chronicle Holdings Ltd. Comm. Arb. Petition 4466/2020 (16th June 2021)

The Bombay High Court observed that an arbitral tribunal cannot apply public law principles on fairness and reasonableness. The Court held that “A writ court may well hold against a public body on a public law principle or by invoking Article 14; But an Arbitrator, constrained as he or she is by the contract, has... Read more » Read more »

Disclaimer

The Rules and Regulations set forth by the Bar Council of India under Advocates Act, 1961 prohibit Advocates or Law Firms from advertising or soliciting work through public domain communications. This website is intended solely to provide information. Karavadi & Associates (“K&A”) does not aim to advertise or solicit clients through this platform. K & A disclaim any responsibility for decisions made by readers/visitors based solely on the content of this website.

By clicking 'AGREE,' readers/visitors agree and acknowledge that the information provided herein (a) does not constitute advertising or solicitation, and (b) is intended solely for their understanding of K & A services. By continuing to use this site, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as outlined in our Cookie Policy.