Dr. M. K. Sharma, J.

( 1 ). Disputes and differences having arisen between the parties in respect of the work contract awarded by respondent No. 1 to the petitioner, the said disputes were REFERRED TO to the sole arbitration of respondent No. 2. The arbitrator after perusing the evidence and upon hearing the parties passed an award on 31st August, 1985 as against which objections have been filed by both the parties. The petitioner has filed objections in respect of the findings of the arbitrator as against claim Nos. 1,2,6,7 and 8, whereas the respondent has also filed an objection, which was registered as I. A. No. 7303/96 as against the award of the arbitrator in respect of claim Nos. 3,4,5, 8,11,12,15 and 16. Preliminary objection is also raised by the respondent that the entire claim of the petitioner was barred by limitation. The said issue was also raised before the arbitrator, who on appreciation of evidence, held that the claims of the petitioner were not barred by limitation.

( 2 ). I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as also the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1 on both the objections as also on the preliminary issue raised in the present case.

( 3 ). Counsel for respondent No. 1 submitted that the petitioner raised its claims and invoked the arbitration clause only on 17th July, 1993 whereas the final bill was ready for payment on 17th April, 1993 and thus, the claim of the petitioner is beyond the period of 90 days as laid down in clause 25 of the contract and is accordingly barred by limitati.

( 4 ). Counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, submitted that payment under clause 10 cc of the contract was made only on 1st January, 1993 and that payment of Rs. 16,000. 00 , which was withheld from the final bill was paid in the month of February, 1994 and thus the claim of the petitioner and invocation of the arbitration clause is not time barred.

( 5 ). Clause 25 of the arbitration agreement provides that a claim is to be raised by the contractor within 90 days from the date of payment of the final bill. According to the said provisions, if a claim is not lodged and arbitration clause is not invoked within 90 days of the date of payment of final bill, the said claim would not be entertained.

( 6 ). Article 137 of the Limitation Act also lays down provisions fixing the time limit for raising the claims and invocation of the arbitration agreement. According to the said provisions, a claim is to be raised within a period of three years from the date when the right to apply first accrues. The Supreme Court in the decision of State of Orissa vs. Damodar Dass reported in 1 (1996) Civil Law Times 294 has held that no right to apply would accrue until there is a clear and unequivocal denial of that right by the respondent.

( 7 ). My attention was also drawn to the notification dated 8. 1. 1997 notifying the Indian Contract (Amendment) Act, 1996 amending the provisions of Section 28 of the Contract Act which provides thus:-

"every agreement: (a)By which any party thereto is restricted absolutely from enforcing his rights under or in respect of any contract, by the usual legal proceedings in the ordinary tribunal, or which limits the time within which he may thus enforce his rights; or (b)Which extinguishes the rights of any party thereto, or discharges any party thereto from any liability, under or in respect of any contract on the expiry of a specified period so as to restrict any party from enforcing his rights, is void to that extent. "prescribing that an agreement by which a party thereto is restricted absolutely from restricting his rights under or in respect of any contract, which limits the time within which he may thus enforce his rights, is void to that extent. However, I need not enter into the aforesaid aspect of the matter in view of the fact that the Arbitrator in the present case on consideration of the evidence on record found that the claim of the petitioner is wit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document