SAR PARIVAHAN PVT LTD. Vs. HONDUSTAN COPPER LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant has filed this appeal challenging impugned order dtd. 25/6/2019 passed by First Additional District Judge, Balaghat (MP) in MJC No.127/2017 by which application under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was dismissed.

(2.) Learned Court below held that limitation for filing application under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1996") shall be counted from date of passing of award dtd. 22/6/2017. Application filed for modification of award under Sec. 33 of Act of 1996 will not have any bearing as said application was filed on merits of award and not on grounds under Sec. 33(1)(a)(b). Application under Sec. 34 ought to have been filed within period of three months i.e. by 22/9/2017 but no application was filed in said time frame. No application was filed for condonation of delay neither any reason for delay was given in application under Sec. 34 of Act of 1996. In reply to application filed by non-applicant under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC, no reason explaining delay was mentioned. In view of aforesaid circumstances of the case, First Additional District Judge, Balaghat (MP) dismissed the application under Sec. 34 of Act of 1996.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for appellant submitted that appellant ought to have been given benefit of Sec. 33 of Act of 1996. Running of limitation ought to have been considered from date of rejection of application under Sec. 33 of the Act 1996 and not from date of passing of award. Learned Court below committed an error of law in not granting the said benefit to the appellant.