A petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act must include a copy of the award, failing which it is deemed invalid.

JUDGMENT :

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.

1. The instant petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed challenging an Award dated 31.03.2024 by which the Ld. Sole Arbitrator has allowed the claim of the Respondent herein and has dismissed the counter claim of the Petitioner herein.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts which are relevant for the purpose of this challenge as mentioned in the Award, are as under:

i. The Respondent herein is a company incorporated under the Companies Act. The Petitioner herein used to place orders on one M/s Coral Products Pvt. Ltd. (CPPL) for importing crude Palm oil (edible grain) from foreign suppliers, for delivery at Kakkinada Port, Andhra Pradesh (now Telangana).

ii. The goods so imported pursuant to the orders placed by the Petitioner herein were sold to the Petitioner herein on the High Seas through various High Seas Sales Agreements dated 07.01.2011.

iii. CPPL was later amalgamated with the Respondent herein under scheme of amalgamation, approved by this Court vide Order dated 25.04.2014.

iv. The Respondent herein, in the Arbitration proceedings stated that after giving credit to all the payments made by the Petitioner herein, there was an outstanding amount of Rs, 2,09,18,103.19/- which was stated to be due and payable to the Respondent herein as on 04.07.2013 v. The Respondent herein, on 08.06.2016, in terms of Clause 15 of the HSSA sent a legal notice to the Petitioner invoking Arbitration and calling upon them to pay Rs. 2,09,18,103.91/- and convey its consent for appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes which arose between the parties.

vi. The Respondent then approached this Court by filing a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act being Arb. P. 540/2016 and this Court vide Order dated 18.04.2017 appointed an Arbitrator.

3. The petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act is accompanied by an application for condonation of delay in filing the Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act. The same has been objected by the Respondent herein stating that the challenge has been filed beyond the period prescribed under Section 34 of the Act.

4. The short question which arises for consideration is whether the petition under Section 34 of the Act has been filed within the time period prescribed under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act.

5. The log information as placed on record indicates that Petitioner filed the Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act on 26.07.2023 when total of 80 pages were filed. The said petition was filed in 116 days of the passing of Award. The defects were notified by the Registry on the same day.

6. Material on record indicates that the petition was filed without an award or any documents, the filing was marked as defective and sent back for re-filing on the very same day. The Petitioner herein filed the petition again on 07.10.2023 and the same defects were again notified by the Registry to the Petitioner herein. The matter was finally re-filed on 10.10.2023.

7. Ld. Counsel for the Respondent herein states that the filing on 26.07.2023 and re-filing on 07.10.2023 which was without the Award is a non-est filing, i.e., it cannot be taken as a filing at all and the re-filing on 10.10.2023 which assuming to be the correct filing has been made beyond the time prescribed under Section 34 of the Act and therefore the present petition cannot be considered.

8. Per contra, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends that the initial filing was within the period of limitation and was not a non-est filing. He states that the objections to the petition were cured, and the petition was again filed on 10.10.2023 in proper format containing detailed grounds after thorough analysis of the impugned award. The petition was duly stamped and supported by a duly executed affidavit and accompanied by a vakalatnama and therefore cannot be said that the