NORTHERN COALFIELDS LTD Vs. ALUMINIUM INDUSTRIES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal u/s 37 of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (to be referred as the 'Act' hereinafter) read with Order XLIII Rule 1 and Section 104 Code of Civil Procedure is to the order dated 28.3.2011 passed by Addl. District Judge (Court No.1), Sonebhadra in Misc. Case no. 12 of 2009 filed u/s 34 of the Act in respect of award dated 25.8.2007.

(2.) At the time of hearing of appeal a preliminary jurisdictional objection was raised on behalf of the appellant contending that the Court of Additional District Judge is not a 'Court' within the definition of Section 2 (1) (e) of the Act, therefore, it has no jurisdiction to dispose of objections u/s 34 of the Act filed by the appellant before the District Judge, Sonebhadra against the impugned award dated 25.8.2007. In these circumstances, presently we are confined only to this issue and are not dealing with the merits of the case. Reliance has been placed by the appellant on the case of M/s I.T.I. Ltd. Allahabad Vs. District Judge, Allahabad and others, 1998 AIR(All) 313 Per contra learned counsel for the respondent fairly conceding that the view of this Court in the above noted case is contrary to the findings of trial Court has valiantly tried to contend that the Court of Additional District Judge in a district is not inferior to the Court of District Judge and thus the impugned order does not suffer from any jurisdictional error.

(3.) It is not disputed that the appellant, a Government company engaged in the mining operation for extraction of coal in the States of M. P. and U. P. awarded a contract worth Rs. 29,73,31,100.00 and works & services for Rs. 18,35,59,000.00 to the respondent company for construction of 4-million ton per year capacity Coal Handling Plant at Khadia District Sonebhadra (U.P.) on turn key basis. The contract was. The schedule period of completion of plant was 24-months from the date of handing over the site i.e. 22.11.1993. However, agreed revised date of completion was fixed as 25.6.1994 due to delay in handing over of site by the appellant. Later on by way of mutual agreement the plant was divided in two phases. After completion of both phases it was mutually agreed to conduct the performance guarantee test of total place from 2.3.1998 to 31.3.1998. A committee of officers was constituted and test was completed on 31.3.1998. The committee thereafter recommended to take over the total plant for commercial operation w.e.f. 1.4.1998. The respondent was however, given time to remove short comings and complete balance work within one year i.e. up to 31.3.1999.