Whether court can allow time barred amendment of pleading?

Or. 6 R. 17 - Amendment to pleadings/claims - Permissibility - Reiterated, court should decline amendments if a fresh
suit on the amended claims would be barred by limitation on the date of application - A time-barred claim cannot be
asserted after the prescribed period of limitation,

Voltas Ltd. v. Rolta India Ltd., (2014) 4 SCC 516

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
Ss. 43, 2(9), 8, 11 and 21 - Counterclaim - Whether made within limitation period - Determination of - Relevant date for -
General rule and exception thereto laid down in Praveen Enterprises, (2012) 12 SCC 581 - Twin test for invoking said
exception - Reiterated, general rule is that the date on which counterclaim is made by respondent before arbitrator will
be its date of institution - Thus, it is normally with reference to this date that it has to be determined whether counterclaim
is made within limitation - S. 21 is not relevant for counterclaim - However, there is an exception to this general rule:
where respondent against whom a claim is made, had (i) also made a claim against the claimant, and (ii) sought
arbitration by serving a notice to the claimant but subsequently raises that claim as a counterclaim in the arbitration
proceedings initiated by the claimant, instead of filing a separate application under S. 11, then the limitation for such
counterclaim should be computed with reference to date of service of notice of such claim on the claimant and not with
reference to date of filing of the counterclaim before arbitrator,

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
Ss. 43, 2(9), 21 and 23 - Counterclaim(s) whether raised within limitation period - Reckoning of - Exception to general
rule as laid down in Praveen Enterprises, (2012) 12 SCC 581 (see Shortnote A) - Applicability of -
Quantification/particularisation of counterclaims - Extent to which, and stage at which must be done to take benefit of
said exception, to escape time bar - In instant case, in response to appellant's claims, respondent served notice on
appellant for referring counterclaims on 17-4-2006 under specific heads for Rs 68.64 crores, but filed enhanced
counterclaims of Rs 333 crores by including claims for damages on 26-9-2011 before arbitrator - Hence, in view of
Praveen Enterprises, (2012) 12 SCC 581, held, only counterclaims for Rs 68.64 crores raised in notice to claimant were
within limitation since said notice was within 3 yrs from date when cause of action arose - Enhanced counterclaims for
damages over and above Rs 68.64 crores made for the first time before arbitrator are barred by limitation since they
were filed beyond 3 yrs from date when cause of action arose - Respondent's plea that such claims for damages raised
before arbitrator are also within limitation as it reserved right to quantify them in the notice dt. 17-4-2006 rejected since
time-barred claims cannot be asserted after prescribed period of limitation - Matter remitted to arbitrator by limiting
counterclaims to Rs 68.64 crores to decide disputes on merits, 
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
Ss. 8, 11 and 23 - Quantification/particularisation of claims/counterclaims for referring disputes to arbitration - Extent to
which, and Stage(s) at which may be done - Requirement of submitting specified claims for arbitration - Explained in
detail, 
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
S. 34 - Arbitration award - Interference - When permissible - Held, court can interfere when arbitrator makes an
incorrect and inapposite appreciation/application of proposition of law, 
Precedents
Interpretation of judgments
Repetitive use of words - Held, to understand correct ratio stated in a case, it is necessary to appreciate repetitive use
of words, 
Civil Procedure Code, 1908

Or. 6 R. 17 - Amendment to pleadings/claims - Permissibility - Reiterated, court should decline amendments if a fresh
suit on the amended claims would be barred by limitation on the date of application - A time-barred claim cannot be
asserted after the prescribed period of limitation,