Court lacks jurisdiction to extend limitation period under Section 34(3) of the Act even in case of nullity of award.

Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by learned District Judge, Hoshiarpur dated 13.8.2008 by which the objections filed by the appellant under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the Act) against the ex parte arbitral award dated 30.4.2003 has been dismissed on the ground of limitation.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, an agreement between the appellant and the respondent for the work of "making protection of side slopes in deep cutting reach on right side of MHC in between RD17000M to RD17500M" was entered into on 14.12.1990 There was a dispute between the parties in respect of the work contract, which was referred to the sole Arbitrator for adjudication. On a few dates, the appellant had appeared before the Arbitrator but from 29.8.2002, the appellant stopped appearing, resultantly the Arbitrator carried out ex parte proceedings and announced his award under various heads of the claim set up by the claimant/respondent herein. The objections filed by the appellant under Section 34 of the Act have been dismissed by the Court primarily on the ground of limitation observing that the award was announced on 30.4.2003, copy of the award was received by the appellant on 13.5.2003 but the objections under Section 34 of the Act were filed on 22.9.2003 after a period of 4 months and 9 days of the passing of the award. The learned Court below has observed that total period of limitation for filing of objection under Section 34 of the Act is 90 days under Section 34(3) of the Act, which can be further extended for a period of 30 days, but not thereafter. Thus, even if a period of extra 30 days is provided to the appellant, the objections filed by the appellants were still beyond limitation. Therefore, finding no alternative, the objections were dismissed by the Court below as the Court does not have the jurisdiction to extend the time even for any sufficient cause thereafter.

3. The present appeal is filed by the appellant along with a Civil Misc. Application No.l725-CII-2010 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay of 385 days in filing of the appeal. Application is supported by an affidavit of Er. Rand- hir Singh, Sr. Executive Engineer, MHC (O&M), Division, Punjab State Electricity Board, Talwara, District Hoshiarpur. Before touching the merits of this case, notice in the application was issued by this Court on 25.1.2010. Pursuant to which respondent has put in appearance through Mr. Vivek Suri, Advocate, who has contested the application by filing reply thereto. While the case was being heard on the application for condonation of delay, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that de hors the delay in filing of the present appeal, the objections filed by the appellant before the Court below under Section 34 of the Act were beyond limitation and there is no error in the order of the Court below which can be cured by this Court in this appeal. This Court then asked Mr. Sukhbir Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant to argue the main case instead. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that award passed by the Arbitrator is a nullity, yet he could not satisfy the Court that the impugned order passed by the Arbitrator dated 30.4.2003 suffers from any illegality. He has admitted that the award was passed on 30.4.2003. The Department had received copy of the award on 13.5.2003 and the objections were filed on 22.9.2003. He has also stated that even if all the period provided under Section 34(3) of the Act is used in favour of the appellant, still there is a delay of 9 days in filing of the appeal. The question is thus, whether learned Court below or even this Court has the jurisdiction to extend the period of limitation beyond the period of 90 days + 30 days as provided under Section 34(3) of the Act even in the case where the award is a nullity?

4. Learned counsel for the appellant could not refe