Back
2006(3) JLJ 320
Subhash Samvatsar, J.
State of M.P. and others v. Manoj Sharma and another
Writ Petition No. 1386 of 2006;
Decided on 27.9.2006
The dispute arose between the parties regarding the execution of works and the payment of bills. The respondent No.1 was not paid the amount claimed by him hence he approached the respondent No.2 as per clause 29 mentioned above. Respondent No.2, purported to he acting as an arbitrator, has passed award Annexure P-3. [Para 4
It is alleged in the petition that of the said award, the order dated 21.6.2005 passed by the respondent No.2 was not complied with. Hence, ultimately the award was put to execution before the civil Court. In the execution proceedings, the present petitioners raised number of objections by filing an application under Order 21 Rule 11 CPC in which a specific objection was raised that the execution proceedings cannot continue as the award passed by respondent No.2 is unexecutable by the civil Court. This objection was rejected by VII Additional District Judge, Gwalior, by order dated 16.11.2005 (Annexure P-13). Petitioners have filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by the said order. [Para 5
Held : From the language of section 7B and section 16 of the Adhiniyam, 1983 it is clear that under section 7B the words used are "decision of the final authority", while section 16 of the Adhiniyam provides that Tribunal shall, after recording evidence, if necessary, and after perusing the material on record and on affording opportunity to parties to submit their arguments, make an award. Thus, words used in section 16 are "make an award", while words used in section 7B are "decision of the final authority". Thus, decision of the final authority becomes executable only after it is converted into an award. Section 18 of the Adhiniyam, 1983 provides that an award of the Board shall be executable in the manner a decree of civil Court is executable. The decision of the final authority cannot be said to be an award of the Tribunal. 2006(1) JLJ 322 distinguished. [Paras 25, 26 & 33
(2) Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (M.P.) -- Ss.2(d), 2(i), 7 and 16 -- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 -- S.9 -- works contract -- dispute regarding ascertained sum -- 1983 Adhiniyam being a special enactment, will prevail over the conciliation Act -- such dispute is covered by Adhiniyam. 2003 Arb. WLJ 109 (MP) and 2004 Arb. WLJ 20 (SC) distinguished. 2002(3) MPLJ 389 and 1988 JLJ 60 I relied on. [Paras 25 & 26
(3) Constitution of India -- Arts. 226/227 -- award passed by arbitral Tribunal -- civil Court has no jurisdiction to execute such order -- powers can be exercised in challenge against order of civil Court in such execution proceedings. 2006(1) MPHT 61 (SC) distinguished. [Para 10
(4) Constitution of India -- Art. 227 -- writ petition -- application for intervention not maintainable. [Para 12
(5) Merger -- principle applies in appeal -- where appellate Court either confirms the correctness of the order or sets aside the same. [Para 14
¼1½ ek/;LFke~ vf/kdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1983 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 7] 7&[k] 8] 16] 17] 18] 19] 2¼?k½ rFkk 20 && ladeZ lafonk dk dksbZ Hkh i{kdkj fookn vf/kdj.k dks funsZf‘kr dj ldrk gS && ,sls funsZ‘k ds iwoZ vafre izkf/kdkjh ds le{k tkuk gksrk gS && vafre izkf/kdkjh dk fofu‘p; vf/kfu.kZ; ugha gS && og /kkjk 16 ds v/khu vf/kdj.k }kjk vf/kfu.kZ; cuk;k tkuk gksrk gS] rc og flfoy U;k;ky; }kjk fu"ik| gksrk gSA
i{kdkjksa ds chp ladeZ ds fu"iknu rFkk fcyksa ds lank;; ds laca/k esa fookn mB [kM+k gqvkA izR;FkhZ Ø-1 dks mlds }kjk nkok dh xbZ jde dk lank; ugha gqvk blfy, Åij mfYy[kr [kaM 29 ds vuqlkj og izR;FkhZ Ø-2 ds le{k vk;kA izR;FkhZ Ø-2 us] ftldk ek/;LFk gksuk rkRif;Zr gS] vf/kfu.kZ; mikca/k ih&3 ikfjr fd;kA ¼iSjk 4
;kfpdk esa vfHkdfFkr gS fd ml vf/kfu.kZ; esa ls izR;FkhZ Ø-2 }kjk ikfjr vkns‘k fnukad 21-6-2005 dk vuqikyu ugha gqvkA vr%] varr% vf/kfu.kZ; flfoy U;k;ky; ds le{k fu"iknu ds fy, j[kk x;kA fu"iknu dk;Zokgh esa] bl ;kphx.k }kjk flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk ds vkns‘k 21 fu;e 11 ds v/khu vkosnu Qkby dj dbZ vk{ksi fd, x, ftuesa ,d fofufnZ"V vk{ksi fd;k x;k fd fu"iknu dk;Zokgh tkjh ugha jg ldrha D;ksafd izR;FkhZ Ø-2 }kjk ikfjr vf/kfu.kZ; flfoy U;k;ky; }kjk vfu"ik| gSA ;g vk{ksi lkrosa vij ftyk U;k;k/kh‘k }kjk vkns‘k fnukad 16-11-2005 ¼mikca/k ih&13½ }kjk ukeatwj fd;k x;kA mDr vkns‘k ls O;fFkr gks dj ;kfp;ksa }kjk lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn 227 ds v/khu ;g ;kfpdk Qkby dh xbZ gSA ¼iSjk 5
vfHkfu/kkZfjr % vf/kfu;e] 1983 dh /kkjk 7&[k rFkk /kkjk 16 ls ;g Li"V gS fd /kkjk 7[k ds v/khu iz;qDr ‘‘kCn gS ^^vafre izkf/kdkjh dk fofu‘p;** tcfd vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 16 }kjk micaf/kr gS fd vf/kdj.k] lk{; vfHkfyf[kr djus ds i‘pkr~] ;fn vko‘;d gS vkSj vfHkys[k dh lkexzh dk ifj‘khyu djus rFkk i{kdkjksa dks viuh cgl izLrqr djus dk volj ns dj] vf/kfu.kZ; ikfjr djsxkA vr% /kkjk 16 esa iz;qDr ‘‘kCn gS ^^iapkV ikfjr djsxk**] tcfd /kkjk 7&[k ds v/khu iz;qDr ‘‘kCn gS ^^vafre izkf/kdkjh dk fofu‘p;**A vr%] vafre izkf/kdkjh dk fofu‘p; vf/kfu.kZ; esa laifjofrZr gksus ds i‘pkr~ gh fu"ik| gksrk gSA vf/kfu;e] 1983 dh /kkjk 18 }kjk micaf/kr gS fd cksMZ dk vf/kfu.kZ; mlh izdkj ls fu"ik| gksxk ftl izdkj flfoy U;k;ky; dh fMØh fu"ik| gksrh gSA vafre izkf/kdkjh ds fofu‘p; dks vf/kdj.k dk vf/kfu.kZ; ugha dgk tk ldrkA 2006¼1½ ts ,y ts 332 izHksfnrA ¼iSjk 25] 26 ,oa 33
¼2½ ek/;LFke~ vf/kdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1983 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 2¼?k½] 2(i)] 7 rFkk 16 && ek/;LFke~ vkSj lqyg vf/kfu;e] 1996 && /kkjk 9 && ladeZ lafonk && vfHkfuf‘pr jkf‘k ds lacaf/kr fookn && 1983 vf/kfu;e fo‘ks"k vf/kfu;fefr gksus ds dkj.k lqyg vf/kfu;e ij vfHkHkkoh gksxk && ,sls fookn vf/kfu;e }kjk vkPNkfnr gSA 2003 vkjfc- MCY;w ,y ts 109 ¼,e ih½ rFkk 2004 vkjfc-MCY;w ,y ts 20 ¼,l lh½ izHksfnrA 2002¼3½ ,e ih ,y ts 389 rFkk 1988 ts ,y ts 601 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 25 ,oa 26
¼3½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku && vuq- 226@227 && ek/;LFke~ vf/kdj.k }kjk ikfjr vf/kfu.kZ; && flfoy U;k;ky; dks ,sls vkns‘k dks fu"ikfnr djus dh vf/kdkfjrk ugha gS && ,slh fu"iknu dk;Zokfg;ksa esa flfoy U;k;ky; ds vkns‘k ds fo:) vk{ksi esa ‘kfDr;k¡ iz;qDr dh tk ldrh gSA 2006¼1½ ,e ih ,p Vh 61 ¼,l lh½ izHksfnrA ¼iSjk 10
¼4½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku && vuq-227 && fjV ;kfpdk && e/;{ksi dk vkosnu xzkg~; ugha gSA ¼iSjk 12
¼5½ foy;u && vihy esa fl)kar ykxw gS && tgk¡ vihy U;k;ky; ;k rks vkns‘k dh ‘kq)rk dks iq"V djrk gS vFkok mls vikLr djrk gSA ¼iSjk 14
1. The petition is filed by the State under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 16.11.2005 passed by VII Additional District Judge, Gwalior, and for quashing the Execution Proceedings No. 181/05 pending in the Court of III Additional District Judge, Gwalior.
2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.1 is a contractor and registered with the Public Works Department. He carries on the business of taking contracts from Public Works Department and other departments of the Government. On 15.10.2001 respondent No.1 entered into an agreement for construction of a road from 1 Km. to 31 Km. Parihar Pagara Road, Annexure P-1. The total cost of the construction was Rs.176.12 lacs. As per the terms of the contract, the respondent No.1 was required to submit running bills. Accordingly, he submitted the running bills from time to time and was paid an amount of Rs.120 lacs. However, the remaining bills were not paid and therefore, the dispute arose.
3. The agreement contained clause 29 which reads as under:
Clause 29. -- Except as otherwise provided in this contract all question and dispute relating to the meaning of the specifications, designs, drawings and instructions herein before mentioned and as to thing whatsoever, in any way arising out of or relating to the contract, designs, drawings, specifications, estimates, concerning the works, or the execution or failure to executive the same, whether arising during the progress of the work or after the completion or abandonment thereof shall be referred to the Superintending Engineer in writing for his decision, within a period of 30 days of such occurrence. Thereupon the Superintending Engineer shall give his written instructions and/or decisions within a period of 60 days of such request. This period can be extended by mutual consent of the parties.
Upon receipt of written instructions or decisions, the parties shall promptly proceed without delay to comply such instructions or decisions. If the Superintending Engineer fails to give his instructions or decisions in writing within a period of 60 days or mutually agreed time after being requested or if the parties are aggrieved against the decision of the S.E., the parties may within 30 days prefer an appeal to the Chief Engineer who shall afford an opportunity to the parties of being heard and to offer evidence in support of his appeal. The Chief Engineer will give his decision within 90 days. If any party is not satisfied with the decision of the Chief Engineer, he can refer such disputes for arbitration by an Arbitration Board to be constituted by the State Government which shall consist of three members of whom one shall be chosen from among the officers belonging to the Department not below the rank of S.E., one retired Chief Engineer of any Technical Department, and one serving officer not below the rank of S E., belonging to another Technical Department.
The following are also the terms of this contract namely:
(a) No person other than the aforesaid Arbitration Board constituted by the Government (to handle cases of all Technical Departments) shall act as Arbitrator and if for any reason that is not possible, the matter shall not be referred to arbitration at all.
(b) The State Government may at any time effect any change in the personnel of the Board, and the new members or members appointed to the Arbitration Board shall be entitled to proceed with the reference from the stage at which it was left by his or their predecessors.
(c) The party invoking arbitration shall specify the dispute or disputes to be referred to Arbitration under this clause together with the amount or amounts claimed in respect of each such dispute(s).
(d) Where the party invoking arbitration is the contractor, no reference for arbitration shall be maintainable, unless the contractor furnishes a security deposit of a sum determined according to the table given below, and the sum so deposited shall on the determination of Ar
SupremeToday
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
