Hon’ble Amitava Lala, J.—The impugned order passed by the learned Civil Judge/Judge, Small Causes Courts, Bijnor dated 26th July, 1993 in Original Suit No. 193 of 1991 (M/s Taxmaco v. State of U.P.) in the capacity of Civil Judge arising out of an award dated 3rd August, 1989 of Justice L.P. Nigam, former Judge of Allahabad High Court, as Umpire, which was challenged by the State for setting aside the same but ultimately failed and the decree was passed on the award, is under challenge.

2. As per the erstwhile Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter in short called as the ‘Act’) an award can be challenged in the Court of law under Sections 30 and 33 of the said Act. When Section 30 is subject, Section 33 is procedural. As per Section 30 of the Act, there are three conditions for the purpose of challenging the award, as under :

“30. Grounds for setting aside award.—An award shall not be set aside except on one or more of the following grounds, namely—

(a) that an arbitrator or umpire has misconducted himself or the proceedings;

(b) that an award has been made after the issue of an order by the Court superseding the arbitration or after arbitration proceedings have become invalid under Section 35;

(c) that an award has been improperly procured or is otherwise invalid.”

3. Out of the aforesaid grounds, ground Nos. (b) and (c) are admittedly not under challenge hereunder. The remaining issue of misconduct of the arbitrator/umpire was the basic point for consideration by the Court, where such application was filed in the form of suit challenging the arbitration award. From the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Judge, it appears that three issues were framed, which are as follows (as per the English version supplied by the contesting parties) :

“(1) Was the arbitral award outside the jurisdiction or authority of the arbitrators, as has been stated in the objection, if yes then its effect?

(2) Whether misconduct committed by the arbitrator in the process of arbitral award or judgment or by themselves? If yes, then its consequence and effort.(sic)

(3) Relief.”

4. Additionally, a very important question arose before this Court as regards limitation. Under Section 14 of the Act, provisions of signing/filing/notice of the award by the arbitrator/umpire or the Court have been specified. As the scope and ambit of Section 14 of the Act is very pertinent in this context, the same is quoted hereunder :

“14. Award to be signed and filed.—(1) When the arbitrators or umpire have made their award, they shall sign it and shall give notice in writing to the parties of the making and signing thereof and of the amount of fees and charges payable in respect of the arbitration and award.

(2) The arbitrators or umpire shall, at the request of any party to the arbitration agreement or any person claiming under such party or if so directed by the Court and upon payment of the fees and charges due in respect of the arbitration and award and of the costs and charges of filing the award, cause the award or a signed copy of it, together with any depositions and documents which may have been taken and proved before them, to be filed in Court, and the Court shall thereupon give notice to the parties of the filing of the award.

(3) Where the arbitrators or umpire state a special case under clause (b) of Section 13, the Court, after giving notice to the parties and hearing them, shall pronounce its opinion thereon and such opinion shall be added to, and shall form part of, the award.”

5. If one allows the time to expire from putting any objection in the form of setting aside, if any, then the Court will pass judgment in terms of award which will be followed by a decree, in terms of Section 17 of the Act. Section 17 of the Act is quoted hereunder :

“17. Judgment in terms of award.—Where the Court sees no cause to remit the award or any of the matters referred to arbitration for reconsideration or to set aside the award, the Court shall, after the time for mak