JUDGMENT :

ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

1. Heard the parties.

2. No one turns up on behalf of the respondents inspite of repeated calls. The hearing of this appeal is taken up ex-parte.

3. This appeal, under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, has been preferred by the appellants against the order dated 18.05.2007, passed in Misc. Case No. 08 of 2006 by the Sub-Judge-I, Hazaribagh whereby and where under, the learned Sub-Judge-I, Hazaribagh has dismissed the petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by the appellants as the same was barred by limitation.

4. The brief facts of the case is that an agreement was entered into on 15.07.1988 between the appellant no. 2 and the original sole respondent who has since been substituted by his legal representatives being the respondent no. 1 to 5 during the pendency of this appeal; for construction of a bridge by 14th July, 1990. The construction activity at the site was taken up in a very slow pace and by the end of 1991, the work was done up to deck slab level. The respondent completed the work besides some extra work which was beyond the agreement. In Title Suit No. 36 of 1999, Sri B.B. Sinh