AdvocateKhoj
Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library
    

Report No. 76

8.53. Comment in Bombay case.-

The decisions, however, relate to the period before the Arbitration Act of 1940 was enacted. After the enactment of section 37(1) and section 37(5) of the Arbitration Act, 1940, no further question, it has been held1, arises as to application of the principles of the Limitation Act merely by analogy to proceedings before arbitrators. The court observed:

It may seem rather curious, and it may also in certain cases result in hardship as to2 why the Legislature should not have excluded all time taken up in good faith before an arbitrator just as the time taken up in prosecuting a suit or an appeal in good faith is excluded. But obviously the Legislature did not intend that parties should waste time in infructuous proceedings before arbitrators."

1. Purshottamdas v. Impex (India) Ltd., AIR 1954 Born 309 (311), para. 7 (Chagla, C.J. and Dixit, J.).

2. Emphasis added.



Arbitration Act, 1940 Back




Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys