BEHARI LAL SURI Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Certain disputes having arisen between the petitioner and the respondent, the same were referred to the arbitration of Pir Zada Ghulam Nabi Commissioner and Secretary to Government Housing and Urban Development Department, Jammu and Kashmir in terms of an agreement entered into between the parties. The Arbitrator entered upon the reference and published his award. The petitioner thereafter filed an application under Sections 14/17 of the Arbitration Act requesting for a direction to the Arbitrator to file the award in court. A notice was accordingly issued and the arbitrator filed the award in court. The parties took notice of the filing of the award on 31-3-1975. The petitioner thereafter filed an application under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act praying that the award be declared as invalid and non existent in the eye of law on a number of grounds. The respondent resisted the application and filed his objections to the application under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act. He requested that the award be made a rule of the Court.

(2.) On 11-8-1975 following issues were framed :

(3.) The petitioner only appeared as his own witness and did not lead any other evidence. The respondent, on the other hand, did not lead any evidence at all. Issue No: 1 A perusal of the award, dated 12th September, 1974 shows that the same has been prepared on a plain paper. It is not disputed by the parties and rightly so, that the award of the arbitrator was required to be made on a stamp paper. Section 17 of the Stamp Act provides that instruments chargeable with duties and executed by any person in India are required to be stamped before or at the time of their execution. According to learned counsel for the petitioner the award not being on a stamp paper is inadmissible in evidence and as such cannot be acted upon for any purpose whatsoever. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent, submits that though the award is not on a stamp paper, yet the Court can admit it in evidence on payment of stamp duty and penalty or in the alternative remit the award to the arbitrator for re-writing the same on a stamp paper and it cannot be declared invalid on this account. Reliance in this respect is placed on a iudg-ment of the judicial Commissioner of Nagpur in Ram Kumar v. Kushal Chand Ganesh Dass, AIR 1928 Nag 166, where the Court, after holding that the award in question was unstamped and had therefore, no valid existence, remitted the same to the arbitrator under para 14 Schedule 2 Civil P. C. (corresponding to Section 16 of the Arbitration Act) for re-writing and engrossing it on a stamp paper.