V LAXMIKANT AND COMPANY Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these appeals arise out of a common judgement and order passed by the learned Single Judge on 1st May, 1998. The appellants were the original petitioners. They filed the above petitions and prayed for an appropriate writ, direction or order, quashing and setting aside the order dated 9th July, 1997 passed by a Tribunal constituted under the Gujarat Public Works Contract Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1992) on an application Ex. 5 in TAR No. 310 of 1996 and in companion matters. By the said order, a preliminary contention raised on behalf of the present appellants was negatived. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellants before the Tribunal was that the proceedings before Arbitrator were over and hence they could not have been transferred to the Tribunal in view of the provisions of Section 21 of the Act of 1992.

(2.) Before the learned Single Judge, it was argued that the provisions of Sections 12 and 21 of the Act of 1992 must be construed in their proper perspective and conjoint reading of both the sections make it abundently clear that the proceedings in which Award or interim Award was made by the Tribunal under the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1940 ), will not be affected and cannot be transferred. Sections 12 and 21 of the Act of 1992 read as under :- Section : 12 :

(3.) The learned Single Judge, after considering the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners-appellants and interpreting the provisions of Section 21 of 1992 Act in the light of a decision of the Division Bench in State of Gujarat Vs. Rajesh Builders, (1993)2 GLR, 1176, held that the proceedings could not be said to be over. In Rajesh Builders (supra), the Division Bench held that even in those cases, where an award was passed by an Arbitrator under 1940 Act, could be said to be pending unless and until the said award has been made rule of the Court. Since the proceedings could be said to be pending proceedings, the provisions of Section 21 of the Act of 1992 would be attracted and no illegality can be said to have been committed by transferring such proceedings to the Tribunal. It is this order, which is challenged in the present group of Letters Patent Appeals.