ORDER

1. The appellant has filed the present arbitration appeal being aggrieved by the award dated 23.1.2013 passed by 22nd District Judge, Indore in MJC AV No.14/2018 whereby the application filed u/s. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1996” for short) has been dismissed as time-barred.

2. Facts of the case, in short, are as under :

2.1 The appellant is a proprietorship firm engaged in the business of supply of cotton bales and other materials having its registered office at 111, Sri Kanyaka Parameswari Enclave, Etukuru Road, Guntur. Respondent No.1 contacted the appellant for the purchase of cotton bales and placed a purchase order dated 30.9.2010 for a suply of 600 cotton bales. The purchase order contains an arbitration clause and according to which, all the disputes will be settled amicably or will be referred to arbitration in accordance with the Rules and By-laws of the Cotton Association of India and the contract shall be subject to Indore jurisdiction. Since the specified quantity of cotton bales could not be supplied within the agreed time by the appellant, respondent No.1 issued a debit-note on 8.2.2011 to the appellant but the payment was not made. Respondent No.1 approached the Cotton Association of India for settlement of the dispute by way of arbitration. Shri Pankaj D. Mepani was appointed as a sole Arbitrator who registered the claim of respondent No.1 as Arbitration Case No. 19/2012-13. The appellant did not participate in the arbitration proceedings and proceeded ex-parte. The Arbitrator passed the final award dated 24.8.2012 for sum of Rs.18,89,677/- with interest @ 15% per annum.

2.2 The appellant received notice of Execution Case No.128/2014 from the Court of 3rd District & Sessions Judge, District Guntur, Andhra Pradesh. Thereafter, the appellant inquired and came to know that an ex-parte award dated 24.8.201 had been passed against it in Arbitration Case No. 19/2012-13. The appellant further came to know that respondent No.1 had approached the High Court of Bombay by filing an application for transfer of the Execution Case from Mumbai to Guntur, Andhra Pradesh as the properties of the appellant are situated there. The said application was allowed vide order dated 19.9.2013.

2.3 The appellant filed Notice of Motion No.254/2015 challenging the ex-parte award and also for setting aside the order of transfer of execution case. The High Court of Bombay vide order dated 26.2.2015 held that the appellant should file an arbitration petition u/s. 34 of the Act of 1996 before the Single Judge of the High Court of Bombay. In compliance of the said order, the appellant filed the petition u/s. 34 of the Act challenging award dated 24.8.2012, according the appellant filed and same was registered as Arbitration Petition No.1635/015. Respondent No.1 appeared and opposed the petition on the ground of territorial jurisdiction. The High Court of Bombay vide order dated 20.7.2016 dismissed the said Arbitration Petition on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction.

2.4 The appellant challenged the aforesaid order of the learned Single Judge by way of an appeal (Appeal (L) No.402/2016 before the Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay which too was dismissed vide order dated 6.2.017. Thereafter, the appellant approached the apex Court by way of a Special Leave Petition (SLP) which was also dismissed after condoning the delay vide order dated 4.10.2017.

3. According to the appellant, the fact regarding the dismissal of the SLP came to its knowledge on 28.11.017 when notice of the Execution Case No.153/2017 was received t for appearance. Then, the appellant preferred application 34 of the Act of 1996 before the District Court, Indore challenging the award dated 4.8.2012. Since there was a delay in applying, therefore, an application u/s. 14 of the Limitation Act was also filed . Respondent No.1 opposed the application by submitting that the limitation beyond 120 days can