NATIONAL BANK FOR AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT Vs. GAUTHAM CONSTRUCTION AND FISHERIES PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts are fairly clear and simple. But certain important questions arise for consideration in this case. THE applicants had entered into a contract with the respondent under which the respondent had agreed to provide accommodation to the applicant on a ownership basis on the terms and conditions, set out in the agreement. THEre were disputes between the applicants and the respondent. THE disputes were eventually referred to the arbitration. THE sole arbitration (Mr. Justice M. R. A. Ansari (retired) made an award in favour of the respondent Gautham Construction & Fisheries private Ltd. , on 24th May, 1980 ). He made the award and sent a copy of the award and enclosing the same to both the parties and authorised them to file the signed copy of the award on his behalf in this court and inform him so that he shall send the original award and the records of the proceedings to this court. THE respondents herein on receipt of this signed copy of the award from the arbitrator filed O. P. No. 216/90 under Sec. 14 (2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 praying. x x x x x

(2.) IT is seen from the receiving seal of the original side of this court that the O. P. 216/90 was filed by the respondent herein on 21. 6. 1990. On 30. 7. 1990 I passed the following order, "award filed. Receive the award, Notice returnable by three weeks. Private notice is also permitted" * .

(3.) THE applications 5161/90 and 5162/90 were resisted by the first respondent/petitioner in O. P. 216/90 stating that the applicants though received the notice from the counsel on 4. 8. 90 as time No. 15 together with the applicants'name printed, no one appeared on their behalf and on 5. 9. 90 i. e. , after the expiry of 30 clear days the case was posted in the list again as item No. 21 together with name of the applicant in order to give final opportunity to the applicant, but the applicant failed to make arrangements to appear in the court on 5. 9. 90, and on their failure to appear in the court on 5. 9. 90 this court had to decree the petition as prayed for after setting the respondent ex parte. It is also stated in the counter that the respondent's counsel had enclosed a copy of the petition alongwith the registered letter dated 31. 7. 90 as evidenced by the Postal receipt. In answering the allegations made by the applicants in their affidavit regard to the filing of the O. P. to set aside the award under Sec. 30 of the Act, the respondent has only stated in para 6 of the counter thus.