Back
2008(4) Supreme 335
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Madhya Pradesh High Court)
S.B. Sinha, J.
State of M.P. and another — Appellants
versus
Anshuman Shukla — Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 3498 of 2008
(Arising out of SLP © No. 12778 of 2007)
Decided on : 12-05-2008
(b) Indian Evidence Act – section 3 – All authorities who are legally authorised to take evidence and whose decision is final and binding between the parties is a court – Relevant tests to distinguish between tribunal and court restated – Hence the authorities created under the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983, are ‘Court’ within the meaning of the Evidence Act. (Paras 16 to 18)
AIR 1956 SC 66; AIR 1956 SC 153; AIR 1965 Pat 227; AIR 1967 SC 1494 – Relied upon.
ILR (4) Cal. (15) 483 (FB); AIR 1954 Patna 289; AIR 1976 Andhra Pradesh 270; AIR 1967 All. 5; 71 Bombay Law Reporter 732 – Cited with approval.
AIR 1965 Pat 227 – Referred.
© Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Section 115 – While exercising revisional jurisdiction, the High Court exercises appellate jurisdiction. (Para 21)
AIR 1970 SC 1 – Relied upon
(d) Indian Evidence Act – Section 3 – The Tribunal created by the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 is a separate forum for the purpose of determination of disputes arising out of the works contract – It is empowered to reject a reference at the threshold, to summon records and record evidence – The disputes can be referred from one Bench to another – Its decision is final and it can award costs and interests which are executable as decree of civil court – The Award of this Arbitral Tribunal is not subject to the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1940 and the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1944 – Its proceedings are judicial in nature subject to revisional jurisdiction of the High Court – Therefore the Tribunal for all intent and purport is a Court. (Paras 22 and 23)
(1974) 2 SCC 133 – Relied upon.
(e) Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – The Arbitral Tribunal being a Court, sub-section (2) of Section 29, Section 5 of the would apply – It is only when the limitation provided under the Special Law, is different from that prescribed in the Schedule appended to the Limitation Act, sub-section (2) of Section 29 would be attracted. (Para 25)
(2003) 2 SCC 577; (2001) 8 SCC 470.
Facts of the case :
1. Applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 in the matter of entertaining a revision application before the High Court in terms of Section 19 of the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 is involved in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 30th June, 2005 passed by a Full Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur in Civil Revision No.1330 of 2003.
Findings of the Court :
Nagar Palika Parishad, Morena was not correctly decided.
Result : The matter requires consideration by a Larger Bench.
JUDGMENT
S.B. Sinha, J. —
1. Leave granted.
2. Applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (for short the 1963 Act) in the matter of entertaining a revision application before the High Court in terms of Section 19 of the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (for short the Act) is involved in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 30th June, 2005 passed by a Full Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur in Civil Revision No.1330 of 2003.
3. Before embarking on the said question we may notice the statutory provisions of the Act for resolution of the legal issue. The Act came into force with effect from 1st March, 1985. It was enacted to provide for the establishment of a Tribunal to arbitrate on disputes to which the State Government or a Public Undertaking (wholly or substantially owned or controlled by the State Government), is a party, and for matters incidental thereto or connected therewith. The Arbitral Tribunal is constituted in terms of Section 3 of the Act for resolving all disputes and differences pertaining to works contract or arising out of or connected with execution, discharge or satisfaction of any such works contract.
Section 7 provides for reference to Tribunal. Such reference may be made irrespective of the fact as to whether the agreement contains an arbitration clause or not. Section 7-A provides for the particulars on the basis whereof the reference petition is to be filed.
Section 7-B provides for limitation for filing an application, which is in the following terms :-
“7-B. Limitation.- (1) The Tribunal shall not admit a reference petition unless -
(a) the dispute is first referred for the decision of the final authority under the terms of the works contract; and
(b) the petition to the Tribunal is made within one year from the date of communication of the decision of the final authority :
Provided that if the final authority fails to decide the dispute within a period of six months from the date of reference to it, the petition to the Tribunal shall be made within one year of the expiry of the said period six months.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub- section (1), where no proceeding has been commenced at all before any Court proceeding the date of commencement of this Act or after such commencement but before the commencement of the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran (Sanshodhan) Adhiniyam, 1990, a reference petition shall be entertained within one year of the date of commencement of Madhya pradesh Madhyastham Adhikarn (Sanshodhan) Adhiniyam, 1990 irrespective of the fact whether a decision has or has not been made by the final authority under the agreement.
(2-A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the Tribunal shall not admit a reference petition unless it is made within three years from the date on which the works contract is terminated, foreclosed, abandoned or comes to an end in any other manner or when a dispute arises during the pendency of the works contract :
Provided that if a reference petition is filed by the State Government, such period shall be thirty years.”
4. Chapter IV of the Act contains Sections 16 to 18. Section 16 deals with passing of an award by the Tribunal and/or its Benches. Section 17 gives finality to the award made thereunder. Such awards made, in terms of Section 18 would be deemed to be a decree within the meaning of Section 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Section 19 confers a power of revision on the High Court, sub-section (1) whereof reads as under :-
“19. High Court’s power of revision. - (1) The High Court may suo motu at any time or on an application for revision made to it within three months of the award by an aggrieved party, call for the record of any case in which an award has been made under this Act by issuing a requisition to the Tribunal and upon receipt of such requisition, the Tribunal shall send or cause to be sent to that Court the concerned award and rec
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
