Bombay High Court
MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LIMITEDversusPrudent Control Private Limited
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The court condoned the 29‑day delay and allowed the petition to be filed under Section 34.
Summary
The applicant, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., sought condonation of a 29‑day delay in filing a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to set aside an arbitral award dated 19 March 2025. The award was received on 2 April 2025, and the petition was filed beyond the three‑month period prescribed by the Act. The applicant explained the reasons for the delay in paragraphs 10‑13 of the application, which the court found to constitute sufficient cause. The respondent, Prudent Control Pvt. Ltd., did not appear despite service of notice. Applying the principle of liberal consideration for condonation applications, the court allowed the interim application and ordered the arbitration petition to be registered for admission. The interim application was consequently disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of 29 days beyond the three‑month period for filing a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can be condoned.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Arbitration
- Condonation of delay
- Section 34
- Arbitral award
- High Court
- Procedural law
Judgment
2026:BHC-OS:20080
8 ia 1433 of 2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1433 OF 2026
IN
ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO.30537 OF 2025
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. ... Applicant
versus
Prudent Control Pvt. Ltd. … Respondent
Mr. Raghavendra S. Mehrotra with Mr. Ansari Gazala i/by L Legal Advocates
and Legal Consultants, for Applicant.
CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J.
DATE : 9 SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant.
2. This is an application for condonation of delay of 29 days in filing the
Petition seeking to set aside the Arbitral Award passed by the the Micro and
Small Enterprises Facilitation Council dated 19 March 2025.
3. Office report indicates that the notice has been duly served on the
Respondent.
4. None appears for the Respondent.
5. In the application, it is averred that the award was received by the
Applicant on 2 April 2025. The Applicant has annexed copies of the postal
envelope and the acknowledgment, which indicate that the award was
received by the Applicant on 2 April 2025. There is a delay of 29 days beyond
SSP 1/2
8 ia 1433 of 2026.doc
the period of three months in filing the Petition under Section 34 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. In paragraph Nos.10, 11, 12 and 13,
the Applicant has ascribed reasons for the delay which occurred in filing the
Petition. The said reasons do make out a sufficient cause for condonation of
delay. In adherence to the fundamental principle that an application for
condonation of delay ought to receive liberal consideration, and the fact that
the Respondent chose not to appear before this court despite service of
notice, this Court is inclined to condone the delay in filing the Petition.
6. Interim Application, thus, stands allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).
7. Arbitration Petition be registered and listed for Admission.
8. Interim Application stands disposed.
( N.J.JAMADAR, J. )
SSP 2/2
Signed by: S.S.Phadke
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 11/09/2026 11:27:42
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.