TATA KESHAVAIAH SETTY Vs. M RAMAYYA SETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN respect of a controversy between the members of a Hindu Joint Family who submitted their disputes to the arbitrators appointed by them so that they might make an award, an award was made on April 18, 1964, and respondent 9 in this revision petition instituted a suit in the court of the Civil Judge Tumkur in Original Suit No. 40 of 1964 for the enforcement of the award. But he withdrew from that suit, the umpire produced the copy of the award before the Civil Judge on June 15, 1966 under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act. The copy was produced since the original award had already been produced in Original Suit No. 40 of 1964 when a summons had been issued by the court for the production of the original award at the instance of respondent 9 in this revision petition.

(2.) IN the proceedings which commenced with the production of the copy of the award by the umpire a contention was raised by the petitioner in this revision petition that the production of the copy of the award by the umpire as late as on June 15, 1966, was affected Article 119(a) of the INdian Limitation Act, 1963 which prescribes a period of thirty days for "application for the filling in court of an award" under the Arbitration Act of 1940.

(3.) IN this revision petition Mr. Lakshminarayana Rao appearing for the petitioner contends that that view taken by the Civil Judge does not fit into the language of Article 119(a) of the Limitation Act, 1963. It was maintained by him that even an arbitrator who wishes to produce his award in court under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act must do so within the period of thirty days prescribed by Article 119(a) and that the production of the copy by the umpire after the expiry of that period of thirty days was not permissible.