Applicability of Section 4 of the Limitation Act to Section 34(3) of the ACA Does Section 4 apply to the additional 30-day condonable period when it expires on a court holiday? Held: Section 4 applies to the prescribed 3-month period but not to the condonable 30 days. (Paras: 26-27, 30.) Applicability of Section 10 of the General Clauses Act Issue: Can Section 10 be invoked to extend the condonable 30-day period? Held: Section 10 is inapplicable as the proviso explicitly excludes cases governed by the Limitation Act. (Paras: 29.2, 32-34) Uniform Applicability of the Limitation Act to Arbitration Proceedings Does the Limitation Act fully govern all timelines under the ACA? Held: The Limitation Act applies, except where expressly or impliedly excluded. (Paras: 15-18)

a. Section 4 of the Limitation Act

• Applies to situations where the prescribed 3-month period expires on a court holiday.
• Does not apply to the condonable 30 days under Section 34(3) of the ACA.

b. Section 10 of the GCA

• Explicitly excluded when the Limitation Act governs the timeline.

c. Judicial Precedents Referenced

1. Assam Urban Water Supply & Sewerage Board v. Subhash Projects & Marketing Limited, (2012) 2 SCC 624.
2. Bhimashankar Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamita v. Walchandnagar Industries Limited, (2023) 8 SCC 453.

The petition under Section 34 of the ACA, filed on July 4, 2022, was deemed barred by limitation as the 30-day condonable period expired during the court vacation, and no further extension could be granted.
Appeal dismissed.

Acts and Sections Discussed:

1. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (ACA):
   • Section 34(3): Limitation for challenging arbitral awards.
   • Section 43(1): Applicability of Limitation Act to arbitration proceedings.
2. Limitation Act, 1963:
   • Section 4: Expiry of limitation period on court closure.
   • Section 5: Extension of prescribed period in certain cases.
   • Section 29(2): Applicability to special or local laws.
3. General Clauses Act, 1897:
   • Section 10: Computation of time when the last day is a court holiday.

Subjects:

• Limitation period.
• Section 34(3) ACA.
• Condonable delay.
• Section 4 Limitation Act.
• Arbitration award challenge.
• Section 10 GCA exclusion.
• Prescribed period.
• Court holiday.

Facts:

The case concerns the dismissal of a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, challenging an arbitral award on the grounds of limitation.

The appellants (My Preferred Transformation & Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. and another) sought to set aside an arbitral award, arguing for the applicability of Section 4 of the Limitation Act to condonable periods under Section 34(3) ACA.

The arbitral award was challenged beyond the prescribed limitation period, but the appellants contended that the delay was due to the court’s closure during the limitation’s final days.

• Section 34(3) ACA for limitation periods.
• Sections 4 and 10 of the Limitation and General Clauses Acts regarding the effect of court holidays on limitation.

The High Court dismissed the Section 34 petition as barred by limitation. This decision was upheld by a division bench under Section 37 ACA, leading to the present appeal.

Issues:

1. Does the Limitation Act apply to Section 34 proceedings of the ACA?
2. Can Section 4 of the Limitation Act extend the condonable period beyond the statutory limits of Section 34(3)?
3. Does Section 10 of the General Clauses Act apply to condonable periods under Section 34(3)?

Submissions/Arguments:

Appellants:

1. Limitation Act provisions, particularly Section 4, should apply to the 30-day condonable period under Section 34(3).
2. Section 10 GCA should aid parties where delays occur during court vacations.
3. Current precedents on limitation in arbitration unjustly curtail remedies.

Respondents:

1. Limitation Act applies only as expressly permitted under ACA.
2. Section 34(3) strictly limits delay condonation to 30 days post the 3-month period.
3. Section 10 of GCA does not apply where Limitation Act is operational.

Decision:

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding:

1. Section 4 of the Limitation Act applies only to the 3-month prescribed period, not the additional condonable period.
2. Section 10 of the GCA is inapplicable as the Limitation Act governs Section 34 ACA.

Ratio Decidendi:

1. The strict timelines under Section 34(3) ACA reflect legislative intent to prioritize finality in arbitration.
2. Section 4 Limitation Act applies only to periods expiring on a court holiday within the "prescribed period" (3 months), not the condonable 30-day extension.
3. The GCA's Section 10 is expressly excluded where the Limitation Act applies.