KOCHHAR CONSTRUCTION WORKS Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this order, I would be disposing the application filed by the petitioner under Order XII R 6 Civil Procedure Code as well as the objection of the petitioner that the objections namely IA No. 4145/95 filed by the respondent/DDA are barred by limitation. The petitioner's prayer accordingly is that the objections filed by the respondent/DDA be dismissed, i.e. IA 4141/95 be dismissed as barred by limitation and the amount of claims in respect of which the petitioner has not preferred any objections, be paid to the petitioner.

(2.) The events leading to the filing of the present application may be briefly recapitulated: The arbitrator Mr. S.C. Kaushik on 27th May, 1994 made and published his award. It is the petitioner's case that a copy of the award was sent by the arbitrator to both the parties on 31st May, 1994. The petitioner filed an application under Section 14 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, on 29th June, 1994. The arbitrator in pursuance to the notice, filed the award along with arbitral record on 6th September, 1994, endorsing copy of the same to the respondent/DDA. In any case, the Court directed the issuance of notice of filing of award to the respondent inviting objections if any. The case of the petitioner is that as per the report of the process server dated 10th October, 1994, notice of the filing of the award was issued for service to the respondent/DDA, but the receipt clerk/DDA refused to accept the same on the ground that copy of the petition/award was not annexed thereto. In the meanwhile, petitioner had also preferred objections to the award vide IA No. 9008/94. Notice of these objections was served on the respondent/DDA on 25th January, 1995, when the counsel for DDA was also present in Court. In the event, the respondent/DDA filed objections to the award vide IA No. 4145/95 on 22nd February, 1994.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Bindra persuasively attempted to urge that the respondent/DDA was fully aware of the making and publishing of the award, the same having been sent to it earlier. He further submits that it was not obligatory to tender either the copy of the petition or copy of the award alongn with the notice of filling of the award. Refusal to accept such a notice as per the report of the process server amounted to service and the respondent/DDA having failed to file objections within time, the award was liable to be made rule of the Court as against the DDA, subject to the decision on petitioner's objections.