Excluded Period Need Not Overlap With Limitation Period To Be Excluded In Arbitral Award Execution: Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court has held that, for the purpose of excluding a period while computing limitation, it is not necessary that the limitation period should have commenced or expired during the period sought to be excluded.

Observing that "the period excluded has to be simply excluded", the court ruled that the period excluded by the Supreme Court during the COVID-19 pandemic must be left out while calculating the limitation for the execution of an arbitral award.

Justice Abhay Ahuja made the observation while allowing an execution application filed by Arch Construction Co against the Union of India and directing the Registry to waive its objection on limitation and register the proceedings.

“Accordingly, under the Scheme of the Limitation Act for a period to be excluded for computation of limitation, it is not necessary that the period of limitation should have commenced or expired during the said period. The period excluded has to be simply excluded.It is only when fresh limitation has to commence for extending the limitation in situation such as acknowledgment of liability or payment of debt, that the said acts should have occurred before the expiry of the prescribed period of limitation and that there is no such requirement for excluding the period of limitation”, it ruled.

The matter came before the Court after the Registry objected that the execution application, filed on December 8, 2025, was barred by limitation. The Registry noted that the arbitral award became enforceable on July 19, 2013 and that the twelve-year limitation period for enforcing the award expired on July 19, 2025.

Appearing for Arch Construction, counsel submitted that the period between March 15, 2020 and February 28, 2022 stood excluded from the computation of limitation in view of the Supreme Court's orders passed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court's decision in IL&FS Financial Services Ltd. v. Adhunik Meghalaya Steels Pvt. Ltd.

The court noted that the award was passed on April 19, 2013 and became enforceable on July 19, 2013. It further noted that the Supreme Court had directed that the period from March 15, 2020 to February 28, 2022 would stand excluded for the purposes of limitation prescribed under general and special laws in judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings.

Accepting the submission, the Court held that the execution application was filed within the limitation period.

“I am of the view that the Execution Application filed on 8th December, 2025, is filed within the period of limitation, as the period between 15th March, 2020 to 28th February, 2022 is to be excluded for the purposes of computation of limitation and the new expiry date for filing of the Execution Application would be 4th July, 2027.”

The court observed that although the Supreme Court proceedings were titled as relating to extension of limitation, the operative directions expressly excluded the specified COVID-19 period from the computation of limitation.

Referring to the scheme of the Limitation Act, the court distinguished provisions dealing with exclusion of time from those concerning acknowledgment of liability or payment of debt.

“What is pertinent to observe is that under the Limitation Act, particularly Sections 12 to 15, which are under part III of the said Act entitled 'Computation of period of Limitation', are in respect of exclusion of time in contradistinction to extension of time.”, the court noted.

The court observed that exclusion provisions require specified periods to be omitted while computing limitation, whereas provisions concerning acknowledgment of liability or payment of debt operate only where the acknowledgment or payment takes place before expiry of the prescribed limitation period.

“These provisions, in my view, are distinct and distinguishable from the provisions under the Limitation Act, which permit computation of a fresh period of limitation in cases of acknowledgment of liability or payment of a debt as in those cases the essential pre-condition is that the acknowledgment in writing or payment of a debt should be before the expiry of the prescribed period of limitation, whereas in the case of exclusion, the period excluded completely stands excluded for the purposes of computation of limitation.”, the court ruled.

The court also referred to the bar of limitation under the Limitation Act. It observed that courts are required to dismiss proceedings instituted beyond the prescribed period even where limitation is not raised as a defence. According to the Court, limitation may go to the root of the matter.

Relying on the Supreme Court's COVID-19 limitation orders and its decision in IL&FS Financial Services Ltd., the court concluded that the entire period between March 15, 2020 and February 28, 2022 had to be excluded.

The court consequently directed the Registry to waive its objection on limitation and register the execution application, subject to any other objections.