1 nms2568-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2568 OF 2010 IN ARBITRATION PETITION (LDG.) NO.685 OF 2010 M/s.Zabatex Textiles India Pvt. Ltd. ....Petitioner V/s. M/s.Tirupur Sri Sentil Cotton Mills Ltd. & Ors. ....Respondents Mr.Jaswant Khatadiya i/b Mukesh Jain & Associates for the Petitioner and in support of the Notice of Motion. None for the Respondents. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 22ND NOVEMBER, 2010. P.C. :- 1. The petitioner seeks condonation of delay of 31 days in filing the petition under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 2. If the delay in filing the petition is of 31 days, this application would have to be rejected as under section 34 of the said Act, the additional period that may be granted is only 30 days. This period has been held to be mandatory and the Court does not have power to extend the same. 3. In fact however, the delay is not of 31 days after the expiry of the original period of 30 days. The petition was filed, at the highest on the 30th day itself, after expiry of the original period of two months. 4. The award was admittedly received by the petitioner on 2 nms2568-10 13.1.2010. However, it was without a covering letter. It was only a copy of the award without any authentication. The period of limitation would therefore commence at the earliest from 13.1.2010. The date from which the period is to be reckoned is to be excluded. Thus the original period of three months expired on 14.4.2010. The Court has a discretion to allow an additional 30 days which expired on 14.5.2010. On 14.5.2010 the petition was filed. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, I am inclined to allow the additional 30 days. 5. Upon the receipt of the award on 13.1.2010, the petitioner on 16.1.2010 addressed a letter to respondent No.1 with a copy to the arbitrator seeking documents and an authenticated copy of the award. A reminder was sent on 6.2.1010. The arbitrator directed respondent No.1 to furnish the relevant papers. The petitioner by a letter dated 2.3.2010 reminded respondent No.1 yet again for the relevant papers. The same was ultimately furnished only on 31.3.2010. This conduct, therefore denied the petitioner a period of over two months in filing the petition. In these circumstances, it would be only fair to exercise discretion under section 34 of the said Act by condoning the delay of 30 days from the date of the expiry of the original period of three months. 6. The delay is therefore, condoned. The petition to come up for admission in due course. 7. The undertaking to file the affidavit of service within two weeks from today is accepted.