STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. SAMARTH CONSTRUCTIONS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 5-7-1995 delivered by the civil judge, sirsi, in arbitration miscellaneous case No. 2 of 1994.

(2.) THE facts of the case in the nutshell are that, an application under Section 14 (2) of the Arbitration Act was made for permission to file the award and for issuance of notice of filing of the award to the parties. That the sole arbitrator in the case between the parties had been the applicant who had moved the application under Section 14 (2) on 28-1-1993. He entered upon the reference and after consideration of the matter and hearing both the parties, the arbitrator passed/delivered the award on 30-12-1993. The said award was submitted before the court with all the documents and the notices were ordered to be issued to both the parties. On 26-2-1994 both the parties were duly served with the notice. The parties though put in appearance through counsels, but they did not file any objections nor any application for setting aside of the award within the period of limitation prescribed under article 119 (b) of the Limitation Act. The present appellant-the state of Karnataka filed its objections on 27-9-1994. That the learned civil court opining that the objections were not filed within time by the parties i. e. , within a period of 30 days from the date of service of notice which notice was served on 26-7-1994, passed the order making the award a Rule of the court and no doubt, it mentioned that the court had awarded interest from the date of decree till the date of its realisation as well at the rate of 18% p. a. the court made the award a Rule of the court and passed the decree. Feeling aggrieved from the judgment and decree dated 5-7-1995, as mentioned earlier, the state of Karnataka has come up in appeal and the appeal has been filed under section 39 of the Arbitration Act.

(3.) THE learned government Advocate contended that no doubt the court had granted time, even after the expiry of 30 days period, to file the objections/application for setting aside abatement which could not be filed within that period and it was filed only in the month of September 1994. When the court had granted time to file the objections, the objections should have been considered before making the award a Rule of the court.