Facts & Background:

• Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd was the Appellant.
• M/S Navigant Technologies Pvt. Ltd was the Respondent.
• A Service Level Agreement dated 02.05.2011 was executed between the Appellant-corporation and the Respondent-company for call center services, with Clause 13 mandating dispute resolution through arbitration by a three-member tribunal under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
• On 16.10.2014, the Appellant-corporation terminated the Service Level Agreement, resulting in disputes between the parties, which were subsequently referred to arbitration.
• The arbitral tribunal orally pronounced the majority award on 27.04.2018, granting relief to the Respondent, with a dissenting opinion by the third arbitrator to be issued separately.
• The dissenting opinion, dated 27.04.2018, was provided to the parties on 12.05.2018, and the signed copy of the award was delivered on 19.05.2018, thereby terminating the arbitral proceedings.
• The Appellant filed objections under Section 34 on 10.09.2018, contending that the limitation period commenced on 12.05.2018, when the signed award was received.
• The Civil Court dismissed the objections on 14.02.2019, ruling that the limitation period began on 27.04.2018, when the majority award was received.
• The High Court affirmed the Civil Court's decision on 11.12.2019, holding that the objections were time-barred, even considering the extended 30-day period under Section 34(3).
• Aggrieved by the rejection of objections on the grounds of delay, the Appellant filed the present appeal.
  

Main Issue:

• Whether the period of limitation for filing the Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 would commence from the date on which the draft award dated 27.04.2018 was circulated to the parties, or the date on which the signed copy of the award was provided? (Paragraph 2)