9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 1298X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y whereby the award dated 18-10-1999 has been challenged. 2. At the outset the counsel for the respondent has taken the objections that the petition as well as the application for condonation of delay are barred by time as per averments of the petitioner. In para 6 of the application the petitioner has categorically stated that he has received the signed copy of the award only on 5-11-1999. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 34 of the Act was filed on 7-3-2000 which according to him was within the statutory period of limitation. However, the application was put under defect and the time was given for representing the same after removing this defect. After removing the defect, the application was filed on 1-4-2000. Thus, according to the petitioner there is a delay of 27 days which was neither wilful nor inten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y from 5-2-2000 to 7-3-2000 but has also filed the delay application beyond the further grace period of 30 days. 7. In view of the mandatory nature of sub-section (3) of section 34, I find that the petition deserves to be dismissed as the petitioner has failed to explain the delay not only in filing the petition under section 34 but also having filed the application through which the delay was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
