MAHESH BAJAJ Vs. DEEPAK CHOTRANI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the order dated 27.06.2018 (Annexure-A/1) passed by the learned 14th Additional District Judge, Bhopal whereby an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for brevity "Act of 1996") has been rejected on the ground that the same was hopelessly time barred.

(2.) As per the facts of the case, the sole Arbitrator passed an award dated 01.12.2011 (Annexure-A/8). The Arbitrator was appointed on an application moved under Section 11(6) of the Act of 1996 and vide order dated 25.02.2011, the Hon'ble Chief Justice directed for appointing the sole Arbitrator. The present appellant was also party in the arbitration case and was impleaded as non-applicant No.2. In arbitration proceeding, the present appellant was being represented by his counsel and after passing of the award, a copy thereof was supplied to the counsel of the present appellant. However, the present appellant filed an application under Section 34 of the Act of 1996 before the Court below on 23.02.2018. The non-applicants had filed their reply to the said application raising an objection therein that the application filed under Section 34 of the Act of 1996 was not maintainable and liable to be dismissed on the ground that same was hopelessly time barred.

(3.) The Court below considered the said objection and decided the application taking note of the relevant facts brought on record and found it suffice to dismiss the same on the ground of limitation.