The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by M/s GoGoal Hydro Pvt. Ltd. against Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL), holding the challenge to a 2019 arbitral award barred by limitation and unsupported by any “sufficient cause” for delay. The Bench of Justice Anil Kshetrapal and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar held that the appellant failed to demonstrate any exceptional or bona fide reason warranting condonation.
GoGoal had appealed against a February 13, 2024, order of the Commercial Court, which set aside the arbitral award. However, the company filed its Section 37 appeal under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, 125 days after the 60-day statutory period prescribed under Section 13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act. Its plea for condonation of delay, citing internal decision-making time, geographical distance (Haridwar to Delhi), and counsel’s “personal exigencies”, was rejected.
The Court held that none of these grounds constituted exceptional or unavoidable circumstances. Instead, the delay was a result of internal indecision, administrative lethargy, and vague, unsubstantiated claims. The Court held that the explanations advanced by the appellant for the delay are ‘vague, unsupported by evidence, and do not rise to the level of “sufficient cause” within the meaning of Section 5 of the Limitation Act’. Even GoGoal’s reliance on a May 2024 corrected order was rejected, with the Bench clarifying that clerical corrections do not restart the limitation.
Referring to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Government of Maharashtra (Water Resources Department) v. Borse Brothers Engineers & Contractors Pvt. Ltd, (2021) 6 SCC 460, the Bench reiterated that the limitation period for appeals of the present nature is strictly 60 days, and condonation of delay in Section 37 appeals is permissible only in rare cases involving short delays, given the arbitration law’s mandate of speed and finality.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of limitation, without examining the merits of the dispute.
Appearances
Appellant- Mr. Vikas Tomar & Mr.Nimish Mishra, Advocates.
Respondents- Ms. Mani Gupta, Ms. Sonali Jain and Ms. Garima Sharma, Advocates.
