URMILA GOEL Vs. HEMLATA GOEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CS (OS) 1762a of 1990 was filed under section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 with respect to an Arbitration Clause as under, contained in the partnership deed between the parties:-

(2.) WITH the consent of the parties, Justice D. R. Khanna (Retd.) of this court was appointed as the arbitrator vide order dated 5th November, 1996 and award dated 4th March, 1998 was made and against which I. A. No. 3188 of 1998 under section 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act 1940 and under section 34 of the arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was filed on behalf of Ms. Hem Lata goyal, Mr. Sanjay Goyal and Mr. Sandeep Goyal and I. A. No. 6230 of 1998 under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was filed on behalf of smt. Urmila Goyal and Shri Ashok Goyal. As noted in the order dated 3rd february, 2005, CS (OS) 1762a of 1990 stood disposed of on the appointment of the arbitrator and the objections, if any, to the award ought to have been filed as independent proceedings. However, since the aforesaid two applications were filed in the CS (OS) 1762 A of 1990 and notices were issued and had been pending for long, it was not felt necessary to require the parties to cure the said defect.

(3.) SMT. Urmila Goyal and Shri Ashok Goyal also filed execution 108 of 1999 of the award treating the same as a decree under the Arbitration Act, 1996. As the aforesaid would show, there was a controversy between the parties as to whether the award was under the 1940 Act or under 1996 Act. However, after the pronouncement of the Apex Court in ONGC Vs. Saw Pipe Ltd. AIR 2003 SC 2629, on 11th January, 2004 the counsel for the parties agreed that the objections may be considered without considering as to whether the objections were under the 1940 Act or under 1996 Act. This has been recorded in this judgment to define the scope of consideration of the objections.