In Brief
A contractor executed work orders from 1982-1986 and claimed entitlement to additional payment for excess work performed. After approximately 32 years, in 2018-2019, the contractor sent a legal notice invoking the arbitration clause and filed an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to appoint an arbitrator. The High Court dismissed the application as barred by limitation. The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal, holding that the period of limitation for the original claim commenced when the work was completed (1985-1986), not when the legal notice was later served. Invoking arbitration decades after the cause of action arose does not revive a stale claim.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.