UNION OF INDIA Vs. BADHWAR AND COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On disputes having arisen amongst the parties concerning the award of work through supply order dated 10th June, 1077 to M/s. Badhwar & Co., the same in terms of arbitration clause were referred for adjudication to the sole arbitration of Shri Vijay Kumar, Deputy Chief Engineer (T.P) who on 29th March, 1990 made and published his award. The respondent/objector filed objections on 7th May, 1992. Admittedly the objections are not within the period of limitation. Therefore, application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, (IA 8397/93) has also been moved seeking condonation of delay in filing objections.

(2.) The facts in brief are that after the award was made and published by the Arbitrator, the same was filed in this Court of which notice was directed to be issued to the parties. The claimant, namely. Union of India was duly served and did not choose to file objections. The respondent was not served and was ultimately directed to be served for 8th April, 1992 through publication in" The Statesman", Delhi edition. In addition it was directed that a notice be also affixed at the last known address of the respondent and also on the notice board of the Court. In pursuance to this order notice of the filing of award as against respondent was duly published in the Statesman on 28th January, 1992 and the record reveals that the publisher on the same day sent a copy Under Postal Certificate to Shri Tilak Raj, Proprietor, on the address of the respondent concern, namely, M/s. Badhwar & Co., Mukteshwar Ashram, Andheria Bagh, Mehrauli, New Delhi. Record further reveals that a copy of notice was also affixed on the given address on 28th January, 1992. Copy of the notice on the Court's notice board was also affixed on 16th January, 1992. In this background, the ground which has been urged in seeking condonation of delay has to be appreciated.

(3.) It is alleged in the application that the respondent for the first time became aware of the pendency of the proceedings for making of the award a Rule of Court only on 8.4.1992, when the clerk of the Counsel for the respondent noticed the case in the cause list and accordingly informed the respondent. The respondent on receipt of information contacted his Counsel and moved an application for inspec- tion of Court's record on 9.4.1992, which was carried out on 10th April, 1992 and thus the objections filed on 7th May, 1992 are within the period of limitation from the date of knowledge of the filing of award. The objections as well as the application seeking condonation of delay are supported only on the affidavit of Shri Tilak Raj, the proprietor of respondent. The facts according to him arc true to his knowledge.