(1.) THIS appeal under Section 37(1) (b) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996 (The Act) is directed against the order dated 26. 08. 2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in OMP No. 232/2005 whereby the objections preferred by the appellant to the arbitral award dated 18. 01. 2005 were dismissed on the ground that the objections were barred by limitation.
(2.) THE claimant / appellant is a Malaysian national. He, inter alia, provides consultancy and engineering services to the oil, gas and fertilizer industry. The appellant's services were engaged by the respondent. Disputes arose between the parties and litigation followed. During the pendency of litigation the parties agreed to appoint Mr. Justice B. P. Jeevan Reddy(retd. ) Judge of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The learned Arbitrator announced his award dated 18. 01. 2005, which was communicated vide proceedings dated 16. 1. 2005. We may note that this award was preceeded by an interim award dated 23. 04. 2004. In the interim award, the learned Arbitrator observed that the issue of limitation could not be decided unless the dates of receipt of monies under the contract, in respect of which the appellant had made his claims, was made known. The final award was a confirmation and completion of the interim award, and it was stated in the final award itself that the interim award, and final award together constitute "the award" and must be read and understood as such.
(3.) WHILE communicating the award dated 18. 1. 2005 to the parties, the learned Arbitrator directed the claimant to ascertain the amount of stamp paper payable on the award and to send the stamp papers at the earliest so that the award could be transcribed on the stamp papers and the original award could be sent to the claimant.