Top Stories[Breaking] SC Applies Order Extending Limitation To Sec 29A & 23(4) Arbitration Act, Section 12A Commercial Courts Act LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK14 July 2020 6:31 AMShare This – xThe Supreme Court has applied its suo moto order extending limitation for filing of cases to Section 29A and 23(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.The order passed by a bench headed by Chief Justice of India on July 10 (but released on July 14) stated :”Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not prescribe…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Supreme Court has applied its suo moto order extending limitation for filing of cases to Section 29A and 23(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.The order passed by a bench headed by Chief Justice of India on July 10 (but released on July 14) stated :”Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not prescribe a period of limitation but fixes a time to do certain acts, i.e. making an arbitral award within a prescribed time. We, accordingly, direct that the aforesaid orders shall also apply for extension of time limit for passing arbitral award under Section 29A of the said Act. Similarly, Section 23(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides for a time period of 6 months for the completion of the statement of claim and defence. We, accordingly, direct that the aforesaid orders shall also apply for extension of the time limit prescribed under Section 23(4) of the said Act”.As regards Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, the Court said :”Under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, time is prescribed for completing the process of compulsory pre-litigation, mediation and settlement. The said time is also liable to be extended. We, accordingly, direct that the said time shall stand extended from the time when the lockdown is lifted plus 45 days thereafter. That is to say that if the above period, i.e. the period of lockdown plus 45 days has expired, no further period shall be liable to be excluded”.The order was passed in applications filed in the suo moto case.E-service of notice allowedThe bench, also including Justices R Subhash Reddy and AS Bopanna, has also allowed the use of electronic means such as e-mail, messenger services (like Whatsapp) for service of notice.”Service of notices, summons and pleadings etc. have not been possible during the period of lockdown because this involves visits to post offices, courier companies or physical delivery of notices, summons and pleadings. We, therefore, consider it appropriate to direct that such services of all the above may be effected by e-mail, FAX, commonly used instant messaging services, such as WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal etc. However, if a party intends to effect service by means of said instant messaging services, we direct that in addition thereto, the party must also effect service of the same document/documents by e-mail, simultaneously on the same date”. The bench has however declined to pass orders extending the validity period of cheque, saying that it was a matter for the Reserve Bank of India to decide by acting under Section 35A of the Banking Regulation Act.It was on March 23 that the Supreme Court suo moto extended the limitation period for filing of cases in Courts/Tribunals with effect from March 15 until further orders. This was done taking note of the difficulties caused to lawyers and litigants by lockdown.On April 6, the Court extended the application of the order to proceedings under Arbitration Act and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.Click here to download OrderRead OrderNext Story
State Rep Emily Slosberg was Baker Acted Last MonthState Rep Emily Slosberg was Baker Acted Last Month
Democratic State Representative and Boca Raton resident Emily Slosberg was involuntarily hospitalized under the Baker Act last month, her father said on Wednesday.Irving Slosberg, Emily’s father, explains that his daughter suffers from PTSD as a result of the death of her twin sister in a 1996 car accident. Emily was hospitalized on October 7 and was released a few weeks later.She is now under partial hospitalization as she recovers, according to her father. He adds that she attended her legislative meetings in Tallahassee last week, and she filed legislation.At about 7:35 a.m. on October 7, a deputy was dispatched to Powerline Road just south of Glades Road after receiving reports of a “suicidal female,” according to the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office. When the deputy arrived on the scene, Emily Slosberg told them she was not taking her medications and that she suffers from depression.The deputy then told Slosberg that he received a report that she was acting erratically and that she may have endangered herself.The sheriff’s report adds that the deputy responded to a nearby Shell gas station earlier that morning, where Slosberg told him that her hands were “on fire” and that she needed medical help, despite the lack of visible injuries to her hands.That is when deputies contacted Irving Slosberg, who told them that Emily showed up at his home that morning unannounced at around 6 a.m., let the dog out, and then left. He also told the deputies that his daughter never recovered from her sister’s death, and “her behavior has deteriorated ever since.”Irving Slosberg says his daughter’s episodes began about a year ago, around the time of her birthday.Earlier this year, Emily Slosberg was arrested and charged with petty theft, trespassing of a structure, and criminal mischief at a home in the Estada community.County property records show that she had sold the home last December. The new owners reported the burglary, according to the incident report released by the Boca Raton Police Department.Irving Slosberg says his daughter does not plan to resign.