Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 4

Supreme Court clarifies limitation period for appeals under Section 61(2) IBC: Tata Steel Ltd. vs. Raj Kumar Banerjee & Ors. (2025) INSC 639 (May 7, 2025)

/ Appeals, Definitions, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 61, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 4, R. Mahadevan

Date of the Judgment: May 7, 2025 Citation: (2025) INSC 639 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J., R. Mahadevan, J. Can the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) condone delays exceeding the statutorily prescribed limit for filing appeals under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC)? The Supreme Court addressed this critical question in the case of Tata […]

Supreme Court clarifies limitation period for appeals under Section 61(2) IBC: Tata Steel Ltd. vs. Raj Kumar Banerjee & Ors. (2025) INSC 639 (May 7, 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation for Challenging Arbitral Awards: My Preferred Transformation vs. Faridabad Implements (2025)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34(3), Arbitration Law, General Clauses Act, 1897, General Clauses Act, 1897 with Section 10, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 29(2), Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 4

Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation for Challenging Arbitral Awards: My Preferred Transformation vs. Faridabad Implements (2025) LEGAL ISSUE: Applicability of the Limitation Act, 1963, specifically Section 4, to the condonable period for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: My Preferred Transformation &

Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation for Challenging Arbitral Awards: My Preferred Transformation vs. Faridabad Implements (2025) Read Post »

Scroll to Top