J B ENTERPRISES Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner entered into a contract with the State for the work of "Construction of a building for Government High School, Ollur" on 26-2-1977. Disputes and differences arose between the petitioner and the respondents relating to the contract and as per the arbitration clause in the agreement the disputes were referred to the appointed arbitrator. He passed an award on 22-3-1985. THE Arbitrator by an authorisation letter dated 11-3-1986 authorised an advocate (who is the advocate for the revision petitioner also) to file the award in Court. Accordingly the award was filed on 11-7-1986. On the same day the revision petitioner filed O.P.(Arb.) No. 82/86 under Sec.17 of the Arbitration Act, for making the award a rule of court and to pass a decree in accordance with the award.

(2.) THE respondents filed an objection contending among other things that the award was filed long after the expiry of the period of limitation provided for under Art.119(a) of the Limitation Act. THEy further contended that as the award was not filed in Court within 30 days from the date of receipt of notice of passing of the award, the application is barred by limitation and a decree according to the award cannot be passed.

(3.) COUNSEL for the revision petitioner contended that the provisions contained in Art.119(a) of the Limitation Act are not applicable for the filing of the award by the Arbitrator himself and that the provisions will apply only td an application by any of the parties to compel the Arbitrator to file the award in Court under Sec.14(2) of the Arbitration Act. On the other hand, Government Pleader contended that the Arbitrator has to file the award or the party has to file an application compelling him to file the award within the period contemplated under Art.119(a) of the Limitation Act and as that having not been done within the prescribed time, no decree can be passed in terms of the award. It is relevant in this context to quote Art.119(a) of the Limitation Act:- Article 119 is in the Third Division to the Schedule to the Limitation Act which deals with applications. It is well-settled that the suits, appeals or, applications which are contemplated under the Limitation Act are normally proceedings before a court. The application contemplated under Art.119 is also one to be made in court. What Art.119(a), contemplates is the period of limitation for an application to be filed in court by any of the parties to compel the Arbitrator to file the award in court. As the Limitation Act deals with the time within which proceedings are to be initiated before court, the provisions therein containing periods of limitation cannot apply to an act to be done by the Arbitrator. Under Sec.14(1) of the Arbitration Act when the arbitrators or umpires have made their award, it shall be signed and notice of the making of the award shall be given to the parties. Sec.14(2) of the Arbitration Act provides that the arbitrators or umpires shall, at the request of any party to the arbitration agreement or any person claiming under such party or if so directed by the Court cause the award or a signed copy of it to be filed in court. On such filing the court shall give notice to the parties of the filing of the award. From Sec.14(2) of the Arbitration Act it is clear that an Arbitrator who makes an award can file it in court suo motu or at the request of any party thereto or under a direction from the court. The above Section contemplates an application by a party to the court to compel the Arbitrator to file the award in court in case he does not file it either at the request of the party or suo motu. From the scheme of the Limitation Act and especially the wording of Art.119, it is clear that the above Article of the Limitation Act will apply only to an application which can be trade by a party under S.14(2) of the Arbitration Act and not for the filing of the award by the Arbitrator himself in the court either at the request of the party or suo motu.