DEVENDRA GUPTA Vs. SHREE RATHI STEELS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short point involved in this matter is as to, "whether the objections filed by the appellant against the award given by the Arbitrator in favour of the respondent were within time inasmuch as, whether, the appellant was entitled to seek condonation of delay under Section 14 of the Limitation Act r/w Section 42 of the Arbitration of Conciliation Act, 1996 ?".

(2.) BRIEFLY stating, the facts of this case are that, the award with respect to the dispute which arose between the parties was passed by the Arbitrator on 30.10.2003. The objections were filed by the appellant before this Court even though in an earlier OMP No. 165/2003 filed by the respondent, the appellant had taken an objection that the OMP No. 165/2003 was not maintainable, as when the Court of District Judge was seized of the matter in view of Section 42 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the OMP No. 165/2003 filed by the respondent in the High Court could not have been filed. However, despite having taken that objection, the appellants themselves filed objections before this court by filing an OMP 44/2004 which was disposed off by this Court vide an order dated 11.04.2005 directing that the objections may be presented before the appropriate Court. Thereafter the appellant filed objections before the LD. Additional District Judge. The learned Additional District Judge dismissed the objections as belated as the objections filed by the appellant on 25.5.2005 were much beyond the period of limitation and the ADJ refused to condone the delay on the ground of good faith and due diligence.

(3.) BEFORE this Court again, similar pleas are sought to be addressed by the appellant, however, the respondents have relied upon a judgment of this Court in OMP No. 17/2002 titled as Union of India and Anr. Vs. Haryana Telecom Limited and Anr. decided on 9.3.2010, where similar issue with regard to condonation of delay was raised. Their objections filed before the District Judge, Chandigarh were returned for re-filing before an appropriate court having territorial jurisdiction and petitioner/objector filed those objections in the Registry of this Court. The ld. Single Judge of this Court after taking note of the provisions contained under Section 14 of the Limitation Act and relying upon a judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Consolidated Engineering Enterprises Vs. Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department and Ors. (2008) 7 SCC 169, observed as under:-