UNION OF INDIA Vs. RUPERA TRANSPORT COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeals are arising out of the proceedings initiated before the City Civil Court (Court No. 13) at Ahmedabad. After the award in question was filed before the Court, the Court issued notice under S.14(2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The present respondent raised an objection and submitted that the Union of India came to know about the filing of the award by the Arbitrator on 9-1-1989, as per the affidavit filed by Mr. P. K. Meena working in D.R.M. office, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. The application for setting aside the award should have been filed, as contended by the present opponent, within a period of 30 days, in view of the provisions of Art. 119(b) of the Limitation Act, and the period of 30 days expired on 3-2-1989. As within the prescribed period, application for setting aside the award was not filed, it was prayed that the application should be rejected. It is admitted position that the application has been lodged on 1-3-1989. Learned Judge accepted the contention raised by the respondent and held and F. A. No. 2412 of 1995 against the order passed by the City Civil Court. that the Railway Authority (Union of India) filed the application to set aside the award under S.30 read with S.33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 only on 1-3- 1989, i.e., after the expiry of the period of limitation as prescribed under S.119(b) of the Limitation Act, and, therefore, dismissed the application.

(2.) On behalf of the appellant, Mr. Shevade, learned Advocate submitted that the trial Court has seriously erred in relying on the decision of the Bombay High Court reported in AIR 1983 Bombay 76 (Dr. V. R. Potdar v. State of Maharashtra) He pointed out that S.14 of the Act is in two parts, and looking to the scheme of the Act, the period of limitation is required to be reckoned on the basis of subsec. (2) of S.14 and not under sub-S.(1) of S.14 of the Arbitration Act.

(3.) Section 14 of the Arbitration Act reads as under :-