Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
(FULL BENCH)
Hemant Gupta, CJ, Vijay Kumar Shukla and Sanjay Dwivedi, JJ.
Telecommunications Consultants India Ltd. v. Madhya Pradesh Rural
Road Development Authority and another
Arbitration Reference No. 2 of 2016 (Jabalpur);
Decided on 3.10.2018
(2) Limitation -- time does not stop to run once it has started to run. (2006)12 SCC 709 followed. AIR 1968 Mad. 161 and 1970 Lab. IC 701 relied on. [Paras 15 & 39
(3) Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (M. P.) -- Ss.7-B (1) (b) -- Limitation Act, 1963 -- Ss. 5 and 9 -- period of limitation started under Adhiniyam -- would not stand revived by subsequent decision of final authority after expiry of limitation in terms of S. 7-B (1) (b) -- even if Arbitral Tribunal is not a Court to which S. 9 of Limitation Act would be applicable -- such principle is based upon common law -- is just and equitable as well -- would be applicable to proceedings under Adhiniyam. (2006)12 SCC 709 followed. AIR 1968 Mad. 161 and 1970 Lab. IC 701 relied on. [Paras 18 & 39
(4) Limitation -- is to compel a person to exercise his right of action within a reasonable time -- also to discourage and suppress stale, fake or fraudulent claims -- one aspect relates to extinguishment of right -- other merely bars claim without affecting right which either remains merely a moral obligation or can be availed for a fresh enforceable obligation -- extinguished right to sue cannot be revived. (1971)2 SCC 860 and (2008)9 SCC 306 followed. [Paras 19 & 21
(5) Interpretation of Statutes -- scope of proviso -- text and context of statute will be determinative -- scope is to carve out exception to main enactment -- has to operate in same field -- cannot be torn apart from main enactment -- nor can be used to nullify by implication what the enactment clearly says -- nor set at naught the real object of main enactment -- unless words of proviso are such that it is its necessary effect. (1976)1 SCC 128 and (1991)3 SCC 442 followed. Jus. G. P. Singh's Principles of Statutory Interpretation (13th Edition, 2012) relied on. [Para 26
(6) Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (M. P.) -- Ss.7-B (1) (b) and 7-B (1) proviso -- proviso limits time for final authority to decide dispute within six months -- final authority does not decide dispute within six months -- cause of action is complete to approach Tribunal, which aggrieved person can do within one year -- proviso is, thus, an exception to sub-clause (b). [Para 32
(7) Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (M. P.) -- Ss.7-B (1) proviso and 7-B (1) (b) -- law of limitation cannot be left to uncertainties -- it is a statutory right -- each word of statute has to be given its natural meaning -- decision not taken within six months -- amounts to deemed rejection of claim -- cause of action is complete -- conferring cause of action to invoke jurisdiction of Tribunal as and when final authority decides matter -- is doing violence to provision of S.7-B (1) (b) -- legislative provision cannot be set at naught by such queer reasoning. 2012(4) MPLJ 212, Civil Revision No. 1343 of 2003, 2005 (3) MPHT 292, 2005 (4) MPLJ 16 and 2006 (4) MPLJ 34 discussed. [Paras 33 & 34
(8) Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (M. P.) -- S.7-B (1) proviso -- aggrieved person fails to seek reference within one year of final decision of final authority, or its deemed decision within six months of making reference -- remedy to seek resolution of dispute stands exhausted -- proviso would be applicable where final authority has not given any decision within six months from date of reference to it. 2006 (4) MPLJ 34 overruled. [Paras 35 & 39
(9) Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (M. P.) -- Ss.2(d), 7-B (1) (b) and 7-B (1) proviso -- dispute in respect of works contract as defined u/s. 2 (d) -- required to be referred for decision of final authority in terms of agreement in question -- reference -- required to be made within one year from date of communication of decision of final authority -- final authority fails to take decision within six months -- amounts to deemed rejection of reference -- cause of action crystallizes on expiry of six months from date of reference.
Whether the proviso to Sub-section (1) of section 7-B of the M. P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 would be applicable in a situation where the final authority has not given any decision within six months? [Para 1
Held: Thus, the question framed is answered that the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 7-B of the Act would be applicable even if the final Authority has not given any decision within six months as the failure to decide within six months leads to deemed rejection of the claim. 2018 (3) JLJ 393 (FB) relied on. Civil Appeal No. 4017 of 2018 decided on 18.4.2018 referred to. 2006 (4) MPLJ 34 overruled. [Paras 37, 38 & 39
¼1½ ek/;LFke~ vf/kdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1983 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 2¼1½¼t½ rFkk 19 && lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 && /kkjk 3 && ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 && /kkjk 5 && vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 19 esa rhu ekl dh fofgr vof/k ds volku ds i'pkr~ iqujh{k.k vkosnuxzg.k djus dh mPp U;k;ky; dh 'kfDr ij dksbZ O;Dr mifjdk varfoZ"V ugha && vr%] ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk fd fo/kk;h vk'k; /kkjk 19 dks ifjlhek vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 5 dk ykxw gksuk vioftZr djus dk FkkA ¼2008½7 ,l lh lh 487 rFkk 2014¼3½ ts ,y ts 173 ¼mPpre U;k-½ vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 14 ,oa 39 ¼2½ ifjlhek && le; O;rhr gksuk vkjaHk gks tk, rks og #drk ughaA ¼2006½12 ,l lh lh 709 vuqlfjrA , vkb vkj 1968 enzkl 161 rFkk 1970 yscj vkb lh 701 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 15 ,oa 39 ¼4½ ifjlhek && O;fDr dks vuq;kstu ds viuh vf/kdkj dk iz;ksx ;qfDr;qDr vof/k esa djus ds fy, ck/; djus ds fy, gS && iqjkus] QthZ vFkok diViw.kZ nkoksa dks fu:Rlkfgr djus vkSj jksdus ds fy, Hkh gS && ,d igyw vf/kdkj ds fuokZiu ls lacaf/kr gS && nwljk vf/kdkj dks izHkkfor fd, fcuk] tks ek= uSfrd ck/;rk cuk jgrk gS vFkok ftldk ykHk u, fljs ls izorZuh; ck/;rk ds fy, fy;k tk ldrk gS] dsoy nkok oftZr djrk gS && okn ykus dk fuokZfir vf/kdkj iquthZfor ugha fd;k tk ldrkA ¼1971½2 ,l lh lh 860 rFkk ¼2008½9 ,l lh lh 306 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 19 ,oa 21 ¼5½ fof/k dk fuoZpu && ijarqd dh O;kfIr && dkuwu ds ikB vkSj lanHkZ ls vo/kkfjr gksxh && O;kfIr eq[; vf/kfu;fer dk viokn rjk'kuk gS && mlh {ks= esa izofrZr gksuk gksrk gS && eq[; vf/kfu;fefr ls i`Fkd~ ugha fd;k tk ldrk && u gh foo{kk }kjk mls 'kwU; djus ds fy, iz;qDr fd;k tk ldrk gS tks vf/kfu;fefr esa Li"V dgk x;k gks && u gh eq[; vf/kfu;fefr dk okLrfod mnns'; O;FkZ dj ldrk gS && tc rd fd ijarqd ds 'kCn ,sls ugha gksa fd ;g mldk vko';d izHkko gksA ¼1976½1 ,l lh lh 128 rFkk ¼1991½3 ,l lh lh 442 vuqlfjrA U;k& th&ih& flag d`r fizfUliYl vkWQ LVSP;wVjh baVjfizVs'ku ¼13ok¡ laLdj.k] 2012½ voyafcrA ¼iSjk 26 ¼6½ ek/;LFke~ vf/kdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1983 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 7&[k ¼1½¼[k½ rFkk 7&[k ¼1½ ijarqd && ijarqd && ijarqd vafre izkf/kdkjh }kjk fookn Ng ekl ds Hkhrj fofuf'pr fd, tkus dk le; lhfer djrk gS && vafre izkf/kdkjh fookn Ng ekl ds Hkhrj fofuf'pr ugha djrk && vf/kdj.k esa tkus ds fy, okn gsrqd iw.kZ gks tkrk gS] tks O;fFkr O;fDr ,d o"kZ ds Hkhrj dj ldrk gS && vr% ijarqd mi[kaM ¼[k½ dk viokn gSA ¼iSjk 32 ¼7½ ek/;LFke~ vf/kdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1983 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 7&[k¼1½ ijarqd rFkk 7&[k ¼1½¼[k½ && ifjlhek fof/k vfuf'prrkvksa ds lgkjs NksM+h ugha tk ldrh && ;g dkuwuh vf/kdkj gS && dkuwu ds izR;sd 'kCn dks mldk LokHkkfod vFkZ fn;k tkuk gksrk gS && fofu'p; Ng ekl ds Hkhrj ugha fd;k x;k && ;g le>s tkus dh dksfV esa vk,xk fd nkok ukeatwj fd;k x;k && okn gsrqd iw.kZ gks tkrk gS && tc Hkh vafre izkf/kdkjh ekeyk fofuf'pr djs rc vf/kdj.k dh vf/kdkfjrk dk vkJ; ysus dk okn gsrqd iznŸk djuk && /kkjk 7&[k ¼1½¼[k½ ds mica/k dk vfrÃØe.k gS && ,slh fofp= rdZ.kk ls fo/kk;h mica/k O;FkZ ugha fd;k tk ldrkA 2012¼4½ ,e ih ,y ts 212] flfoy iqujh{k.k Ø 1343 lu~ 2003] 2005¼3½ ,e ih ,p Vh 292] 2005¼4½ ,e ih ,y ts 16 rFkk 2006¼4½ ,e ih ,y ts 34 foosfprA ¼iSjk 33 ,oa 34 ¼8½ ek/;LFke~ vf/kdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1983 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 7&[k¼1½ ijarqd && O;fFkr O;fDr vafre izkf/kdkjh ds vafre fofu'p;] vFkok funsZ'k djus ds Ng ekl ds Hkhrj mlds le>s x, fofu'p; ds ,d o"kZ ds Hkhrj funsZ'k dh bZIlk ugha djrk && fookn ds lek/kku dh bZIlk djus dk mipkj fu%'ks"k gks tkrk gS && ijarqd ogk¡ ykxw gksxk tgk¡ vafre izkf/kdkjh us funsZ'k fd, tkus ds fnukad ls Ng ekl ds Hkhrj fofu'p; ugha fd;kA 2006¼4½ ,e ih ,y ts 34 myVk x;kA ¼iSjk 35 ,oa 39 ¼9½ ek/;LFke~ vf/kdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1983 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 2¼?k½] 7&[k¼1½ ¼[k½ rFkk 7&[k ¼1½ ijarqd && /kkjk 2¼?k½ ds v/khu ;Fkk ifjHkkf"kr ladeZ lafonk ds ckjs esa fookn && iz'uxr djkj ds fuca/kukuqlkj vafre izkf/kdkjh ds fofu'p; ds fy, funsZf'kr fd;k tkuk visf{kr && funsZ'k && vafre izkf/kdkjh ds fofu'p; dh lalwpuk ds fnukad ls ,d o"kZ ds Hkhrj fd;k tkuk visf{kr && vafre izkf/kdkjh Ng ekl ds Hkhrj fofu'p;u ugha djrk && ;g le>s tkus dh dksfV esa vk,xk fd funsZ'k ukeatwj fd;k x;k && okn gsrqd funsZ'k ds fnukad ls Ng ekl ds volku ij fuf'pr :i /kkj.k dj ysrk gksA D;k e-iz- ek/;LFke~ vf/kdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1983 dh /kkjk 7&[k dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ dk ijarqd ml ifjfLFkfr esa ykxw gksxk tgk¡ vafre izkf/kdkjh us Ng ekl ds Hkhrj fofu'p; ugha fd;k\ vfHkfu/kkZfjr % vr%] fofjpr iz'u dk mŸkj ;g gS fd vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 7&[k dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ dk ijarqd rc Hkh ykxw gksxk tc vafre izkf/kdkjh us Ng ekl ds Hkhrj fofu'p; ugha fd;k] D;ksafd Ng ekl ds Hkhrj fofu'p; djus esa foQyrk ds ifj.kkeLo:i le>k tkrk gS fd nkok ukeatwj gks x;k gSA 2018¼3½ ts ,y ts 393 ¼iw.kZ U;k;ihB½ voyafcrA flfoy vihy Ø&4017 lu~ 2018 fu.khZr fnukad 18&4&2018 fufnZ"VA 2006¼4½ ,e ih ,y ts 34 myVk x;kA
Gupta, C.J. --1. The present revision is placed before us in pursuance to an order passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 10.8.2018 finding divergent views of the two Division Bench Judgments of this Court rendered in Ram Niwas Shukla v. State of M.P., [2006(4) MPLJ 34] and Rajawat and Company. v. State of M.P., [2005(4) MPLJ 16]. The Bench has framed the following question for the opinion of the Larger Bench :
“Whether the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 7-B of the M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 would be applicable in a situation where the Final Authority has not given any decision within six months?”
2. The issue is purely legal and depends upon the statutory provisions. The Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (for short “the Act”) was published in the M.P. Gazette (Extraordinary) dated 12.10.1983 for providing alternative mode of dispute resolution in respect of works-contract granted by State or Public Undertakings. The Act has undergone major changes when M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran (Amendment) Act No. 9 of 1990 was published in State Gazette on 24.4.1990. By virtue of the Amendment, the limitation for raising reference was prescribed, which was not in the original Act as also sub-sections (4) and (5) were added in section 7 of the Act, section 7-A and section 7-B were also added apart from substituting section 2(d) defining “dispute” and 2(i) defining “works-contract”.
3. Subsequently, there was another amendment in the Act. Sub-section (1) of section 7-B has been substituted by M.P. Act No.36 of 1995 whereas sub-section (2-A) was initially inserted by M.P. Act No.19 of 2003 and then substituted by M.P. Act No.1 of 2004 and then again substituted by M.P. Act No.19 of 2005. The relevant provisions of the Act, after the amendment in 1990 and the provisions as up-to-date, are given in juxtaposition, as under :
Relevant Provisions of the Act after amendment in 1990
Relevant Provisions of the Ac Up-to-date
7. Reference to Tribunal. (1) Either party to a works contract shall irrespective of the fact whether the agreement contains an arbitration clause or not, refer in writing the dispute to the Tribunal.
*** ***
(4) Every reference shall be accompanied by such documents or other evidence and by such other fees for service or execution of processes as may be prescribed.
(5) On receipt of the reference under subsection (1), if the Tribunal is satisfied that the reference is a fit case for adjudication, it may admit the reference but where the Tribunal is not so satisfied it may summarily reject the reference after recording reasons therefor.
*** ***
7-A. Reference petition. (1) Every reference petition shall include whole of the claim which the party is entitled to make in respect of the works-contract till the filing of the reference petition but no claims arising out of any other works-contract shall be joined in such a reference petition.
(2) Where a party omits to refer or intentionally relinquishes any claim or any portion of his claim, he shall not afterwards be entitled to refer in respect of such claim or portion of claim so omitted or relinquished.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) disputes relating to works-contract which may arise after filing of the reference petition may be entertained as and when they arise, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed.
7-B. Limitation.(1) The Tribunal shall not admit a reference,-
(a) in a case where a decision has been made in connection with a dispute under the terms of the agreement for a works-contract by the final authority under the agreement unless the refe
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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
