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

Supreme court chooses conclusive adjudication over procedural rigmarole with respect to Divorce at least at the final leg of litigation.

In this landmark case of Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan 2023 INSC 468 a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, led by Justice Sanjiv Khanna, clarified the scope of Article 142 of the Indian Constitution . The Court held that in order to do complete justice it can dissolve Read more »

Supreme Court Declares Ex-Post Facto Environmental Clearances Unconstitutional

In Vanashakti v. Union of India (2025 SCC OnLine SC 1139), the Supreme Court declared ex-post facto environmental clearances unconstitutional, reinforcing that prior clearance under the EIA Notification, 2006 is mandatory. Citing Common Cause (2017) and misuse seen after Pahwa Plastics (2022), the Court stressed stricter environmental governance and procedural Read more »

Kartik Malhar Vs. State of Bihar; (1996) 1 SCC 614

Solitary witness - conviction is valid - Need not insist on corroboration by other witnesses - single witness if found to be trustworthy, it can be appreciated - Interested Witness - Explained. 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.