STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs. L M DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been made on behalf of the State of West Bengal for setting aside an award in favour of the contractor. Disputes and differences arose between the parties out of a contract for excavation of main channel from Krishnapur to Kulti Reach F.G. in connection with Bagjola-Chuni-Jatragachi Drainage Scheme. Under Clause 25 of the contract the said disputes were referred to the sole arbitration of Sri H. N. Brahma, Superintending Engineer, Western Circle, Irrigation and Waterways Directorate, Government of West Bengal, who was duly appointed on July 15, 1963. After taking oral and documentary evidence of both the parties the arbitrator passed an award on December 24,1968, in favour of the contractor whereby a sum of Rs. 1,63,000 was to be paid by the Petitioner. The arbitrator filed the award on or about June 5, 1969, in this Court.

(2.) Mr. M. N. Banerjee on behalf of the contractor has raised the preliminary point that the application is barred by Article 119(b) of the Limitation Act, 1963. Mr. Chakraborty on behalf of the Petitioner has, however, contended that in the present case the Petitioner received the notice under Section 14(2) on or about July 14, 1969, and the present application has been made within 30 days from the said date. Relying upon several decisions he has asked me to reject the contention of the Respondent's counsel.

(3.) As the Respondent has not stated any facts on the basis of which the said preliminary point was raised, supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Respondent showing that the Registrar, Original Side, High Court, Calcutta, wrote to the arbitrator on June 5, 1969, informing him that the award had been filed on that date. On June 13,1969, a copy of the said letter was sent to the Executive Engineer, Canals Division, Irrigation and Waterways Directorate, Government of West Bengal, and also to the contractor. The counsel for the Respondent has argued that the Petitioner and the Respondent duly received copies of the said letter on or about June 16, 1969. Thus, although the Petitioner received the said notice of filing the award the Petitioner chose to make this application on August 12, 1969. Mr. Chakraborty, as stated earlier, has submitted that the period of limitation would commence from July 14, 1969, when the formal notice was served on his client under Section 14(2) of the Act by the Registrar, Original Side, High Court, Calcutta. It may be stated here that the Petitioner has not filed any counter-affidavit in reply to the Respondent's said supplementary affidavit. In course of the argument also Mr. Chakraborty has not contended that the said letter darted June 13,1969, was not received by his client at all. Ordinarily, it is expected that the Petitioner should file an affidavit in reply to the Respondent's supplementary affidavit challenging the sufficiency or validity of the letter or notice dated June 13, 1969. Both the counsel proceeded on the basis that Article 119(b) of the Limitation Act, 1963, would apply in the present case. The said Article reads as follows: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_28_LAWS(CAL)6_1970_1.html</FRM>