BHARAT COKING COAL LTD Vs. L K AHUJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In respect of certain contracts of work assigned by the appellant certain disputes having been arisen, the matter was referred to arbitration. Two awards were made and the same were filed in the court of the civil judge in two title (arbitration) suits nos. 37/86 and 40/86. By a common order, the trial court made the awards rule of court in entirety and decrees were drawn in terms thereof. An appeal was filed against the said common order before the high Court. The High Court having dismissed the said appeal, the matter was carried to this Court.

(2.) On February 21, 2001 by an order made by this Court, the awards were set aside after quashing the orders made by the High court and the trial court and the matter was remanded to the arbitration for a fresh consideration of all points by appointing a new arbitrator Shri Justice Uday Sinha, former judge, High Court of Patna. He made an award and on 25. 01.2002 sent the copies of the award and on 12. 02.2002 minutes of the proceedings before him, to the Court. Report in this regard was placed before this court on 18. 02.2002, copies of which were served upon the concerned advocates. Objections to the award and application to set aside the award have been filed on 11. 04.2002. Now, an objection is raised on behalf of the respondents that the application filed for setting aside the award in terms of Article 119 (b) of the Limitation Act should have been filed within a period of 30 days from the date of filing of the award into the Court; that inasmuch as the office report had been served upon all the parties, it must be deemed that the said office report gives sufficient notice of filing of the award in the Court; that the period of limitation of counting 30 days commenced on 18. 02.2002; that, therefore, the objections filed on 11. 04.2002 are hopelessly barred by limitation. It is further submitted that the court itself may order a notice of filing of the award or even the Registry can take steps to issue such a notice and reliance is placed on certain decisions of this court as to how in situations of this nature 30 days limitation period is to be computed in Indian Rayon Corporation Ltd. v. Raunaq and Company Pvt. Ltd. ; Food corporation of India and Ors. v. E. Kuttappan, and State of Bihar v. Hanuman Mal Jain. In our view, none of these decisions can have any application to the situation arising in the present case.

(3.) The office report was prepared on 18. 02.2002 and the matter was listed before this Court on 11. 03.2002 when this court ordered that "call after four weeks". On 02. 04.2002 the learned counsel for the respondents filed a separate application in both the appeals under section 17 of the arbitration Act, while on 11. 04.2002 the appellant filed an application under section 15 read with section 30 of the Arbitration act raising objections to the passing of decree in terms of the award.