The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to show sufficient cause for delay in filing an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act and the importance of diligence in pursuing the remedy.

Per Veena Birbal, J.

CM No.16680/2008

There is a delay of 20 days in filing the present appeal. In view of the reasoning stated in the application which is supported with affidavit of Shri Dinesh Kumar Singh, Dy. Director of Supply of appellant, delay in filing the present appeal stands condoned.

FAO(OS) No.733/2006

1. Present is an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (in short the Arbitration Act) against the order dated 14th September, 2006 by which the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act of the appellant has been dismissed by learned Single Judge of this Court on the ground of limitation.

2. Briefly the facts necessary for the disposal of the present appeal are that the appellant, Union of India through Director General of Supplies and Disposal entered into a contract with respondent M/s Mahavir Industries for supply of 55 km of 150 sq. mm ASCR conductor. Certain disputes arose between the parties which were referred for arbitration to the sole Arbitrator Shri B.L. Nishad. The Arbitrator made the award on 28.2.2001, in favour of respondent regarding claims No.1 and 4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid award, appellant filed objections by way of making an application under Section 34 of Arbitration Act for setting aside the arbitral award before District Judge, Delhi. This application was filed on 25.4.2001. The application was assigned to an Additional District Judge, who vide order dated 16.1.2002, held that the District court had no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the application and ordered the same to be returned to the appellant under Order VII Rule 10 CPC for presenting in a court of competent jurisdiction. The said application was taken back by the appellant on 4.2.2002 and was filed in this Court on 5.3.2002. Notice of this application was issued by learned Single Judge to respondents who in response moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC for dismissal of the objections on the ground of limitation. Learned Single Judge after hearing the parties allowed the application of respondent and rejected the application of the appellant on the ground that same was not presented to the court within the period of limitation prescribed under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act. Aggrieved with the said order present appeal has been filed.

3. Learned counsel for appellant contended that appellant had pursued his remedy before learned ADJ by moving an application under Section 34 of Arbitration Act. It is contended that if benefit under Section 14 of the Limitation Act i.e. time spent by appellant in prosecuting his remedy in another court is excluded in computing the period of limitation under Section 34 of the Act, there was delay of only seven days in filing objections in the court. It is contended that learned Single Judge could have condoned the same under proviso to Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act. It is contended that learned Single Judge has taken a hypertechnical view in not condoning the delay of seven days.

4. On the other hand learned counsel for respondent has contended that when appellant filed application under Section 34 of Arbitration Act before learned Single Judge, same was not accompanied by an application under Section 14 of Limitation Act seeking exclusion of time spent in pursuing remedy in another court. It is further contended that there was not even an application under proviso to Section 34(3) of the Act seeking condonation of further delay of seven days in filing the application in High Court. It is contended that learned Single Judge has considered all the facts and circumstances and has rightly rejected the application on the grounds of limitation.

5. We have considered the submissions made and perused the record. It is an admitted position that Arbitrator had made an award on 28.2.2001. The award was received by the appellant on 14.3.2001. Application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act was filed by the appellan

Click Here to Read the rest of this document