Each day’s delay has to be properly explained either for filing or for refiling. Where delay is attempted to be explained casually and no effort has been made to explain each day’s delay, application are bound to be dismissed.
This prouncement was made by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the matter Union of India Vs. National Project Construction Corp. Ltd. [OMP (COMM) 35/2018] on 23.03.2018
The main challenge in the instant case was that there was a delay of 22 days initially in filing petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. It was lying under objections for more than 400 days, hence a fresh filing as per rules/law was required and lastly even the objections were filed in this Court after 37 days delay from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order of the learned District Court. The petitioner had tried to casually prove the cause of delay and no attempt was made to explain each day’s delay on all occasions aforesaid.
The Delhi High Court relying on M/s Gautam Associates vs. Food Corporation of India (2010) 2 RAJ 595 (Delhi) held that the record show the gross-negligence on the part of the Union of India as there was delay not only in filing objections under Section 34 of the Act, but also in refiling the petition; O.M.P. (COMM.) 35/2018 and yet again filing it before this Court with a delay of 37 days of dismissing of the petition by the District Court. The Court also relied on M/s. Competent Placement Services through its director/partner vs. Delhi Transport Corporation through its chairman 2011 (2) R.A.J. 347 (Delhi) further held that the petition is hopelessly bared by time as even the filing on 08.12.2017 was delayed for 37 days from the receipt of the certified copies.