( 1 ) THE appellant is the petitioner-plaintiff. These appeal and Revision arise out of proceedings under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act to set aside the award dated 31-3-1979 in the matter of arbitration pertaining to the disputes arising out of a contract No. 27/cfb/65 dated 22-5-1965 relating to the construction of Arts and Science College at Siddipet in Medak district and Sections 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act to receive the award dated 31-3-1979 and make it rule of Court. The 1st respondent is a firm of contractors and in view of the disputes raised with regard to the contract the 2nd respondent was appointed as arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The arbitrator made and signed the award dated 31-3-1979 allowing certain claims in favour of the 1st respondent. The award was filed into court by the 1st respondent with a prayer that it may be made a rule of the Court and decree may be passed in terms of the award and the petition is filed to set aside the award. The reasons in support of the petition for setting aside the award need not be traversed in this appeal as the subject-matter of this appeal is confined to the question with regard to the applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The respondent filed the written statement denying the allegations and contentions and also stated that he petition is not filed within the period of limitation prescribed under Art. 119 (b) of the Limitation Act and it cannot be treated as an application to set aside the award and the Court has no power to extend the period of limitation and permit the Chief Engineer to file objections beyond the period of limitation. The issue that was considered is whether the defendant filed the objections to the award within the period of limitation and this was tried as a preliminary issue. The essential facts culminating in this issue may be stated: The arbitrator made and signed the award on 31-3-1979 and issued notices of the same to both the parties. The award was signed by the arbitrator on 31-3-1979 and on 14-4-1979 the petitioner requested the arbitrator to cause the award to be filed into court or in the alternative authorise him to file the same in his behalf. The arbitrator by his letter dated 16-4-1979 authorised the petitioner to file the award into court and delivered the award into court and delivered the award to the petitioner. The original award dated 31-3-1979 pertaining to the contract was filed into court along with the petition on 21-4-1979. After registering the petition, the court ordered notice to the respondents for their appearance on 22-7-1979. The notice was ultimately returned after service with endorsement that it was served on 5-7-1979. The learned Government Pleader represented that a copy of the award was not furnished to him either by the arbitrator or by the petitioner and he could not get a copy of the same from the court and therefore applied to the court for furnishing the certified copy of the same. The said application was filed on 24-7-1979 and later on the certified copy was obtained on 18-8-1979 and objections were filed on 7-9-1979. It is also represented by the Government Pleader that the Court extended the time to file the counter up to 27-9-1979 and therefore the counter was filed within the time. The period of limitation prescribed for filing application for setting aside the award is 30 days from the date of service of notice of filing the award. The Government Pleader contended that the copy of ht e award was not supplied to him and the time taken by him to obtain a copy of the award should be excluded while computing the period of limitation. After computing the time taken for obtaining certified copy, it was calculated that the time taken by the 1st respondent who filed the application for cancellation of the award was one month and 17 days and this is beyond the period of 30 days limitation prescribed under Art. 119 of the Limitation Act after